Is IT Fair
1. Introduction :
In the February issue of BCA journal, the Ombudsman appointed
for Income-tax matters has written a very nice article which candidly brings out
the limitations imposed on him.
It is a common feeling among taxpayers and professionals that
representations in any revenue department — particularly income tax, sales tax,
service tax — is a nightmare. It is one thing to rake up and make us fight for
important issues of interpretation and also of facts. It is a part of our life.
However, of late, it is experienced that even petty matters consume lot of time
and energy and require intervention at senior level. It often becomes very
irritating and the work suffers. The following are a few such instances.
2. Instances of irritants :
2.1 As mentioned by the Ld. Ombudsman, a simple thing like
giving appeals effect in thousands of VRS cases. It is a question of allowing
relief u/s.89(1) which is more or less a settled position. The same is the case
with giving appeal effect of ITAT orders in respect of exemption u/s.10(10C) of
RBI employees. It never happens automatically. For each and every case, one has
to follow up vigorously. Due to change of wards, jurisdictions and locations (Charni
Road to Bandra), the relevant records are never traceable. It is intriguing that
when something is recoverable from assesses, the record is immediately traced.
(!)
Most of the employees who have taken VRS may not be having
high incomes. They are scattered and not in a position to follow up with the
Income-tax Department. The refunds of subsequent years have been adjusted
against the so-called dues of VRS year — which in fact are non-existent due to
favourable Appellate orders.
Now, for giving appeal effect, they are asking for duplicate
returns, salary certificates and so on. This is only to create hurdles.
2.2 Submissions to ITAT :
Paper-books are required to be submitted one week prior to
the date of hearing. A set meant for the Departmental Representative (DR) is to
be filed at a different location. Even if there is one day’s delay, the staff
refuses to even accept the paper-book. Refusal to accept an inward
correspondence is highly incorrect. The DR may raise objection for delayed
submission and the Members may take a view in the matter. But how can they
refuse to accept the paper-book ?
Further, quite often, the Hon’ble Members direct us to place
on record some documents (e.g., some unreported judgments, etc.) usually
on the same day. Now, it is extremely difficult to ensure that it reaches the
relevant file. There is no acknowledgement. Acceptance with a covering letter is
flatly refused. Then, you are entirely at the mercy of the bench clerk.
The most disturbing feature is that even for submission of
appeal (Form 36), acknowledgement is not issued on the spot. There is a strange
system. The form is to be delivered in good faith. No acknowledgement is given
on your copy; nor even a token receipt is issued. A computerised receipt is to
be collected the next day.
Similarly, your written intimations of change of address are
never acted upon in spite of repeated follow-up. Further, when an adjournment is
sought, it is expected that some responsible person should actually be present
in the Court. The objective is understandable — firstly, to ascertain the
genuineness of reason and also to decide the next date with mutual convenience.
However, in may situations, it is genuinely not possible to remain present. At
least at the time of the first adjournment, when request is filed well in
advance, personal attendance should not be insisted upon.
Nowadays, notices of hearing are often received just 8 to 10
days in advance. How can one submit the paper-books 7 days in advance ?
2.3 Rubber stamp on TDS Certificates :
It is also strange that credit on TDS/TCS certificates is
denied for want of rubber stamp of the issuer. It is extremely cumbersome to
obtain such stamps since the certificates are already filed.
2.4 The returns under the MVAT Act, 2002 are to be submitted
at Mazgaon Office (unlike at decentralised offices at Bandra and Belapur under
the erstwhile BST Act). However, the Sales Tax Offices at Belapur and Bandra are
issuing notices to all the dealers to submit copies of all returns filed under
the MVAT Act, 2002 with effect from 1-4-2005 i.e., the date of
implementation of MVAT. In quite a few cases, even if the dealer is registered
under the MVAT Act just a few months back, the notices require the copies of
returns from April 2005. Notices/reminders to defaulting dealers is
understandable. But taking copies of all returns from the dealers to compile the
list of defaulters is in a way, amounting to shifting of departmental officer’s
duty on dealers and their consultants. Many dealers’ liability under the MVAT
Act being monthly, the dealers have to submit copies of around 30 returns filed
till September’ 2007.
2.5 Under the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessees are
required to pay advance tax in the previous year itself in 3 or 4 installments
on 15th June, 15th Sep., 15th Dec and 15th March. However, there is one more
practical advance compliance of this advance tax provision. The Departmental
authorities frequently call the consultants on 13th or 14th of the month (i.e.,
a day or two prior to the due date) asking for the advance tax paid or proposed
to be paid by the assessees. Can’t the departmental authorities wait for 4 days
to let the data come from the bankers. Is this duty also cast on the
practitioners ? ? ?
Suggestions :
1. Let there be more co-ordination within the Government
Departments.
2. Let all the procedures be reviewed with sensitivity and
sensibility.
