TAX LITIGATION : A GOVERNMENT COUNSEL

PERSPECTIVE

MODERATOR’S OPENING COMMENTS

Sujit Ghosh – AdvocateDelhi High Court & Supreme Court

Partner & National Head, Advaita Legal

2

CBDT - Circular dated 7 February, 2012

“My Dear Chief Commissioners/ Director Generals of lncome Tax (Inv.) and Commissioners/ Directors (International Taxation).

I have taken over as Chairman at a time when Revenue Collections seem to be far away from the budget target with less then two months at hand.

Among the parameters of performance in your area, achievement of revenue collection target will obviously be given the highest weightage while writing your APAR by reporting officers and reviewing officers and will also be a major factor while considering placements during AGT 2012.

I trust that each of you understands that achieving the budget target is non-negotiable.”

3

UOI v KK Dhawan AIR 1993 SC 1478- Criteria prescribed for vigilance

1. Where the officer had acted in a manner as would reflect on his reputation for integrity or good faith or devotion to duty

2. If there is prima facie material to show recklessness or misconduct in the discharge of his duty

3. If he has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a government servant

4. If he had acted negligently or that he omitted the prescribed conditions which are essential for the exercise of the statutory powers

5. If he had acted in order to unduly favour a party

6. If he had been actuated by corrupt motive however, small the bribe may be

4

Bom HC – Sairang Developer’s case

“We do not find how Officers lower down in the hierarchy can take

decisions to file Appeals and that too against the decision of the

Tribunal. The tendency not to accept any adverse verdict on facts

results in frivolous Appeals being filed in this Court. That causes huge

loss to the public exchequer and results in wastage of precious

judicial time of this Court. All this ought to have been discouraged

long time back. The High Court has not adopted a strict approach and

that has possibly encouraged the Revenue in filing Appeals to

challenge essentially findings of fact and with regard to matters which

should stand concluded at the level of the authorities”

Dharmadhikari . J , April 2014

5

Bom HC – L&T’s case

The Revenue officers must realize that just like other powers a

executive power conferred in them is in the nature of a Trust. They

hold office as trustees of the public at large. They deal with public re

and public money and that cannot be wasted in such frivolous

litigation. We, therefore, dismiss these appeals with costs quantified

at Rs.1,00,000/ each. Costs shall be paid to the Maharashtra State

Legal Services Authority, Mumbai within a period of four weeks from

today

It would be open for the superior/competent authority to recover the

costs personally from the officer responsible and equally take

disciplinary action against him ……

© 2015 Advaita Legal, a firm of Advocates.

All rights reserved.

THANK YOU

Delhi 703-706, 7th FloorInternational Trade TowerNehru PlaceNew Delhi 110019Tel +91 11 33232700Fax +91 11 30671304

Mumbai Lodha Excelus, 1st Floor, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalakshmi, Mumbai 400 011Tel +9122 39896000 Fax +91 22 39836000

Disclaimer: Pursuant to the Bar Council of India rules, we are not permitted to solicit work and advertise. You, acknowledge that there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from us or any of our members to solicit any work. The information provided in this is solely available at your request and is for informational purposes only, it should not be interpreted as soliciting or advisement. We are not liable for any consequence of any action taken by you relying on material/ information provided herein. In cases where you have any legal issues, you must in all cases seek independent legal advice.