CBDT Takes Stern View Of Laxity By Counsel And CIT In Court Matters
The CBDT has issued two letters, both dated 20th March 2015, in which it has referred to an incident in the Delhi High Court where the Court had sought information relating to a case. Though the Standing Counsel communicated the directions of the Court to the concerned CIT, this was done in a "routine manner" and without any "follow up". The result is that the Court issued directions and possibly strictures against the department.
In the first letter, the CBDT has made it clear that it is the responsibility of the Standing Counsel to obtain the information called for from the concerned CIT and to communicate the same to the Court. If the issue is not resolved, the Counsel is required to bring the issue to the attention of the CCIT. It is sternly stated that "The Counsel can not absolve himself from his responsibility to get the directions of High Court complied with under any circumstances".
In the other letter, the CBDT has made it clear that it is the responsibility of the CIT to ensure that whenever the Departmental Counsel seeks Instructions/ clarifications in a case the same are attended to by the officers concerned promptly. It is also stated that the Counsel should be briefed properly to strengthen Revenue's case and that the CIT should personally involve himself in cases involving intricate issues of facts/law having wide ramifications or involving high revenue stake.
The letters end with the grim warning that "Any laxity in adherence to this instruction will be viewed adversely against the erring officers".
Regards,
Editor,
---------------------
Latest:
Sardar Balbir Singh vs. ITO (ITAT Lucknow)
S. 147/ 151: Sanction of CIT instead of JCIT renders reopening void. The error cannot be saved u/s 292BB
No comments:
Post a Comment