Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
 
 
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
 
 
 
 
Popular Search: form 3cd :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: empanelment :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: due date for vat payment :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: VAT RATES :: VAT Audit :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: TDS
 
 
From the Courts »
 Nishant Construction Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
 Flipkart India Private Limited vs. ACIT (Karnataka High Court)
 JSW Steel Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
  CIT vs. Uday M. Ghare (Bombay High Court)
 Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) And Ors.
 Rakesh Raj And Associates Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central-Ii & Anr.
 Venu Charitable Society And Anr. Vs. Director General Of Income Tax
 Wadhwa Estate & Developers India Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
 CIT vs. Uday M. Ghare (Bombay High Court)
  Ajay Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds) And Ors.
 Anita D Kanjani vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

CIT Vs. Ram Singh (Rajasthan High Court)
March, 26th 2014

Strictures passed regarding poor quality of orders of the ITAT. Government urged to ensure that only competent persons are appointed Members of the ITAT

The department filed an appeal in the High Court contending that the Tribunal had disposed off the appeals filed before it (relating to rejection of books of account u/s 145 and estimation of gross profit) without giving any reasons. HELD by the High Court:

(i) We find the judgments of the ITAT being the stereo typed, non-speaking, unreasoned, arbitrary and whimsical;

(ii) We cannot avoid observing that of late the quality of orders that are come out from the Tribunal in exercise of its appellate power under section 256 of the Act are found to be wanting and in many respect and many a times the orders are very prefecture, even non-speaking orders and has no correlation to the fact situation that prevails in a given case;

(iii) We also notice that the members of the Tribunal have developed an unhealthy habit of quoting totally unrelated judgments which are not applicable at all to the facts of the case, to pass orders not otherwise sustainable on facts or in law. We strongly deprecate such a tendency on the part of the members of the Tribunal, which is quite naturally a professional Tribunal comprised of expert members, one member from the Revenue side and another member from the accounting side, with considerable experience in their respective fields and to whom we can attribute expertise. We feel sorry that the confidence posed by the Legislature is not being justified by passing orders that are outcome from the Tribunal now-a-days;

(iv) It is high time the method of recruitment to the Tribunal is also reviewed by the authority concerned and at least henceforth it is ensured that the members of some standing, integrity and competence are put in place as members of the Tribunal and not all and sundry;

(v) The Legislature, particularly the Union Parliament may also take note of such tendency on the part of the Tribunal and ensure for suitable legislative measure so that the purpose and the object with which such Tribunals are constituted really subserve not only the interest of aggrieved assessee but also to ensure that the Revenue’s interest is not simply scarified or jeopardized by errant members;

(vi) Registrar General of this court is directed to send copies of this judgment to the Law Commission of India, Secretary to Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance,. Government of India, Secretary to Government, Ministry of law and Parliamentary Affairs, Government of India and the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CIT Vs. Gauthamchand Bhandari 347 ITR 491, 499 (Kar) and several other judgements referred to)

 
 
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2017 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Web Application Development Web based Software Solution Web Application Deployment Web Application Solutions Web Application Software Development Web Application Deployment Web Application Programming Web Application Design and Development

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions