ITAT wants Larger Bench to Review Centre’s Decision on Granting Stay
in Tax Disputes
In a move that could have significant implications for
the corporate sector, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has mooted the
constitution of a larger bench to review a decision by the Centre that imposed
conditions on the powers of the Tribunal to grant a stay in cases related to
tax disputes.
At the centre of this move is
an amendment brought in by the Finance Ministry in February to the Income-tax
Act, 1961, that, in effect, made it mandatory for assessees
to pay at least 20 per cent of the disputed tax amount if they want a stay on
proceedings. Prior to this amendment, the ITAT had the liberty to allow the assessee to pay lower than 20 per cent if it found that the
tax payer was credible and fit for such a relaxation.
The Centre also stipulated that the ITAT should grant a
stay for only 180 days even if the assessee agrees to
pay 20 per cent of the disputed amount upfront. Earlier, the ITAT could extend
the stay up to 365 days and even beyond on a case-by-case basis.
Powers undermined
According to tax experts, these amendments made to
Section 254 of Income-tax Act undermined the powers of the ITAT. “The ITAT,
while granting a stay, looks into the merits of the case as well guidelines
laid down by CBDT for granting a stay of demand, and decides accordingly, so as
to not be unfair with the taxpayers. The amendment seems to interfere with the
exercise of judicial discretion vested in the Tribunal,” said a member of the
Bombay Chartered Accountants’ Society.
While the government has set aggressive targets for tax
officials to shore up revenue, cases of frivolous income-tax demands continue
to rise. In several cases, where stay of demand is sought by taxpayers from ITAT,
the demand raised by the tax department is subject to rectification issues
(like non-grant of credit for tax) . Or the taxpayer
is due to large refunds from the tax department, which have not been released
for some reason or the other.
“These amendments proposed in the Bill seem to stem out
of the need of the government to meet fiscal targets. This gives the impression
that the government seems to be endeavouring to
interfere with the judicial discretion vested in the Tribunal while imposing a
threshold of 20 per cent payment towards outstanding tax demand in the
application seeking a stay,” the chartered accountant said.
Tata Trusts tax
dispute
The issue came up before the ITAT in a tax dispute
related to Tata Trusts. While issuing the order, the Tribunal said that a
larger bench should look into whether the amendment infringes on the powers of
the Tribunal. The larger bench should examine whether the amendment is
directional or mandatory in nature; and whether the said amendment affects the
cases in which appeals were filed prior to the date on which the amendment came
into force.
“We are of the considered view that these issues are of
vital importance to all the stakeholders all over the country, and in our
considered understanding, on such important pan India issues of far-reaching
consequence, it is desirable to have the benefit of arguments from stakeholders
in different parts of the country,” the ITAT said in its order.