CCIT responsible for CIT-Appeals working and quality of orders-CBDT

CCIT responsible for CIT-A working and quality of orders. CIT-Appeals should abide by CBDT instructions for timely issue/dispatch of appellate orders. 

CBDT has stated that failure of the Chief Commissioners of Income Tax to conduct regular  inspections of the CIT (Appeals) working under them or failure to keep a watch on the quality and quantity of orders would be viewed adversely by the CBDT.

CBDT has reiterated its Instruction No. 20/2003 dated 23.12.2003 directing for issue of appellate orders within 15 days of the last hearing. The idea behind such stipulations was to alleviate undue hardship to the assessee and to have a smooth interface with the assessee. The Instruction was reiterated vide CBDT letter F. No. 279/Misc.53/2003-ITJ dated 19.06.2015 for strict compliance. The instructions are also applicable to orders passed by the CIT (Administrative)/ CCIT as regards matters within their purview under different sections of the Income Tax Act. 

Attention has been drawn to Manual of Office Procedure issued by the Directorate of Organisation and Management Services mandates immediate dispatch of appeal order either by registered post or through a notice server without waiting for the appellant to file an application in this regard.

It has been pointed out that delay in uploading of appeal orders on ITBA or violation of the instructions regarding dispatch of appeal orders gives rise to suspicions about backdating of orders and/ or malafide intent on the part of officer/ officials concerned.

CBDT has further pointed out that though the orders are dispatched by the office staff working in the office of CIT (Appeals), it is the responsibility of the CIT (Appeals) to ensure that the CBDT instructions are followed by his office staff in letter and spirit. Violation of CBDT instructions by office staff reflects adversely on the supervisory capabilities of the Officer for not being able to control/ motivate a handful of staff to follow CBDT instructions. Such supervisory failure is also violative of Rule 3(2)(i) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

CBDT has expressed dissatisfaction over many technical and legal lapses noticed during vigilance inspections of CIT (Appeals) where CIT (Appeals) gave relief primarily on legal grounds without considering the facts on record and without making any further inquiry in the matter. In some cases, the additions were deleted in a summary manner solely on the ground that opportunity of cross examination was not given to the assessee

CBDT has advised that in such cases, CIT (Appeals) could have given the opportunity of cross examination to the assessee rather than summarily deleting the additions in such cases since it has been held by Hon’ble Apex Court in a number of cases that the scope of power of CIT (Appeals) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer.

In one case it was found during vigilance inspection that the CIT (Appeals) had not been passing the appellate orders but was showing disposal in statistical statements on a regular This was not noticed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax who was supposed to inspect the work done by the CIT (Appeals). Such a situation would not have arisen if the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax concerned had conducted inspection of the CIT (Appeals) as mandated by CBDT Instruction No. 16/2008 dated 04.11.2008.

CBDT has cautioned that the Chief Commissioners of Income Tax should keep in mind that in the matters of corruption, unless otherwise evidenced , the vicarious liability of a supervisory officer can become absolute, if the supervisor who has the right , ability or duty to control the activities of a subordinate does not take steps to prevent the acts of misdemeanor by the Failure of the Chief Commissioners of Income Tax to conduct regular  inspections of the CIT (Appeals) working under them or failure to keep a watch on the quality and quantity of orders would be viewed adversely by the CBDT.

Download CBDT Communication Click Here >>