Revenue Audit Objections-Remedial Action and Appeal -CBDT Circular

Revenue Audit Objections-Remedial Action and Appeal

Circular No.  8/2016

F.No.246/95/2013-A&PAC-I
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes
******

New Delhi, 11th March, 2016

Subject:- Modification of Instruction 9/2006 – reg.

Instruction 9 of 2006 lays down the guidelines and procedure for attending to Revenue Audit Objections. The Instruction inter-alia mandates the initiation of remedial action in case the Revenue Audit Objection is not accepted by the Department. The Board has considered the effect of such remedial action and its ultimate fate in appeal. Accordingly, to mitigate the effects of the Instruction, para 4 and para 5 of the Instruction are deleted with immediate effect and replaced by the following:

(4) Remedial Action:

(i) An Audit objection should be accepted and remedial action should be taken in a case where the audit objection relating to an error of facts or an issue of law is found to be

(ii) Appropriate remedial action should invariable be initiated within two months of the receipt of the Local Audit Report, and necessary orders should be passed within six months

(iii) Where the PCIT/ CIT does not accept the Audit objection, he may record his reasons for doing so and inform the AG accordingly within two months from the date of receipt of the No remedial action needs to be taken in such cases.

(5) Second appeal in cases involving Revenue Audit Objection:

The adverse order of the first appellate authority in cases involving revenue audit objections should be carefully scrutinised by the PCIT/ CIT, and appeal should not be preferred if the order is justified either in law or on facts. Reasons for not filing appeal may be recorded by the PCIT/ CIT.

(J.K Chandnani)
US (A&PAC)-II,
CBDT, New Delhi.

CBDT, New Delhi.

• Jewellery purportedly received from grandparent under Will added as unexplained credits
• SC lays down tests to determine if a debt is financial debt or operational under IBC
• Commonality of directors of companies does not mean deposits received was bogus
• Application though named as rectification but if tax is not legitimate, it also touches merit: HC
• Cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 taken as per valuer report by reverse indexing of FMV