MUMBAI: The Bombay top court has put aside that portion of CBDT’s action plan that sought to incentivise commissioners of income tax-appeals (CITs-A) who pass ‘high quality’ orders, which might be negative to taxpayers.
“Any temptation in the pointers, known as incentives for disposal of an attraction in a specific way would no longer stand the test of legislation,” the top court held in its written order made to be had on April 22. TOI, in its version dated March 27, had reported on the meantime order the place the top court had requested the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to rethink this facet and apprise it on the steps that might be taken.
As the financial yr 2018-19 used to be coming to a close, CBDT apprised the court that it would carry out the requisite amendments in the action plan for the following financial yr 2019-20.
However, coming down strongly against the plan to incentivise appellate commissioners for high quality orders, the court held: “...the guidelines in its present shape for the previous financial yr also cannot be allowed to have impact.”
CBDT’s action plan for the financial yr 2018-19 had set out that the CITs-A could be allowed further efficiency credits of two units for every high quality appellate order handed. The term ‘high quality’ orders included cases the place the CIT-A enhances the order of the I-T officer (in different words, the quantum of tax demand is larger) or the place he strengthens the order of the I-T officer. It also included circumstances the place the CIT-A levies a penalty on the additions confirmed through him to a taxpayer’s income.
When taxpayers dispute their tax demands, raised through the I-T officer, they manner the CIT-A. This is the first stage of attraction. Based on facts of the case and legalities involved, orders handed through the appellate commissioner can swing either in favour of the taxpayer or the I-T department.
Tax professionals had pointed out that CBDT’s action plan may prejudice the minds of the CITs-A. This led to The Chamber of Tax Consultants, a not-for-profit frame of tax professionals, filing a petition in the top court. Speaking to TOI, Hinesh R Doshi, president of the Chamber of Tax Consultants, termed the decision as a big victory for taxpayers.
He also referred to CBDT’s future course of action. For the financial yr 2019-20, the board would modify the definition of high quality orders to include all attraction orders handed through the CIT (A), whether made up our minds in favour or against the revenue, the place the supervisory commissioner is of the view that the CIT(A) has faithful extra time. This would confer with the time spent for ascertaining the facts and passing exceptionally well-reasoned order, which takes into consideration acceptable judicial precedents. “Thus, the grounds for bias could be eradicated,” Doshi mentioned.
The top court famous that whilst the CBDT has broad powers beneath segment 119(1) to issue orders, instructions and directions to different I-T authorities, as it may deem fit, for correct administration of the I-T Act, it does no longer empower the CBDT to issue instructions or instructions to make a specific evaluation or dispose a case in a specific way. It also seen that appellate commissioners have already handed orders beneath the shadow of the incentivisation programme contained in the action plan. In this background, tax professionals indicate that this order of the top court offers a greater status to aggrieved taxpayers, when they attraction against orders of the appellate commissioners.
The Chamber of Tax Consultants had also challenged the instructions issued through the CBDT in its action plan for disposal of a definite collection of appeals of specified classes, within a specified period of time. The top court didn't in finding this path as objectionable.
“Any temptation in the pointers, known as incentives for disposal of an attraction in a specific way would no longer stand the test of legislation,” the top court held in its written order made to be had on April 22. TOI, in its version dated March 27, had reported on the meantime order the place the top court had requested the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to rethink this facet and apprise it on the steps that might be taken.
As the financial yr 2018-19 used to be coming to a close, CBDT apprised the court that it would carry out the requisite amendments in the action plan for the following financial yr 2019-20.
However, coming down strongly against the plan to incentivise appellate commissioners for high quality orders, the court held: “...the guidelines in its present shape for the previous financial yr also cannot be allowed to have impact.”
CBDT’s action plan for the financial yr 2018-19 had set out that the CITs-A could be allowed further efficiency credits of two units for every high quality appellate order handed. The term ‘high quality’ orders included cases the place the CIT-A enhances the order of the I-T officer (in different words, the quantum of tax demand is larger) or the place he strengthens the order of the I-T officer. It also included circumstances the place the CIT-A levies a penalty on the additions confirmed through him to a taxpayer’s income.
When taxpayers dispute their tax demands, raised through the I-T officer, they manner the CIT-A. This is the first stage of attraction. Based on facts of the case and legalities involved, orders handed through the appellate commissioner can swing either in favour of the taxpayer or the I-T department.
Tax professionals had pointed out that CBDT’s action plan may prejudice the minds of the CITs-A. This led to The Chamber of Tax Consultants, a not-for-profit frame of tax professionals, filing a petition in the top court. Speaking to TOI, Hinesh R Doshi, president of the Chamber of Tax Consultants, termed the decision as a big victory for taxpayers.
He also referred to CBDT’s future course of action. For the financial yr 2019-20, the board would modify the definition of high quality orders to include all attraction orders handed through the CIT (A), whether made up our minds in favour or against the revenue, the place the supervisory commissioner is of the view that the CIT(A) has faithful extra time. This would confer with the time spent for ascertaining the facts and passing exceptionally well-reasoned order, which takes into consideration acceptable judicial precedents. “Thus, the grounds for bias could be eradicated,” Doshi mentioned.
The top court famous that whilst the CBDT has broad powers beneath segment 119(1) to issue orders, instructions and directions to different I-T authorities, as it may deem fit, for correct administration of the I-T Act, it does no longer empower the CBDT to issue instructions or instructions to make a specific evaluation or dispose a case in a specific way. It also seen that appellate commissioners have already handed orders beneath the shadow of the incentivisation programme contained in the action plan. In this background, tax professionals indicate that this order of the top court offers a greater status to aggrieved taxpayers, when they attraction against orders of the appellate commissioners.
The Chamber of Tax Consultants had also challenged the instructions issued through the CBDT in its action plan for disposal of a definite collection of appeals of specified classes, within a specified period of time. The top court didn't in finding this path as objectionable.
High court nixes CBDT ‘rewards’ plan
![High court nixes CBDT ‘rewards’ plan]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
April 24, 2019
Rating:
