LLB 2 Sem
LLB 2 Sem
ASPX)
(Home.aspx)
ISSN
2321-5763 (tel:2321-5763) (Online)
0976-495X (Print)
Keywords: Tax Authorities in India () Central Board of Direct Taxes () Powers of Income Tax Authorities ()
View PDF
:
Various Tax Authorities and their Powers under
the Income Tax Act
Surbhi Gupta
Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur
*Corresponding Author E-mail: [email protected]
ABSTRACT:
For effective financial management it is imperative to understand the functioning, the powers and the limitation on the powers of tax
authorities. This proves to be of even more relevance in the light of the current scenario in India where there is an uncertainty in the
mind of the assesses with regard to the power that can be exercised by these authorities and where there have been a number of
instances of abuse of these rule- making powers which have the effect of contradicting statutory provisions that have been given
binding effect, displacing the authoritative pronouncements of the Higher Judiciary and causing an erosion of the constitutionally-
mandated effect of Supreme Court declarations under Article 141.This paper explains in a simple manner the various tax authorities
established under the Income Tax Act, the Central Board of Direct Taxes and it’s powers, the powers of other Income Tax authorities,
the jurisdiction of the Income-Tax Authorities, and a conclusive analysis of the same with the objective to enable a comprehensive
understanding of the functioning of tax authorities for the purpose of financial management.
KEY WORDS: Tax Authorities in India, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Powers of Income Tax Authorities
INTRODUCTION:
In India, the Central Government has been empowered by Entry 82 of the Union List of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India to
levy tax on all income other than agricultural income. The Income Tax Law comprises The Income Tax Act 1961, Income Tax Rules
1962, Notifications and Circulars issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT), Annual Finance Acts and Judicial
pronouncements by Supreme Court and High Courts. The Government of India imposes an income tax on taxable income of
all persons including individuals, Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs), companies, firms, association of persons, body of individuals,
local authority and any other artificial judicial person. Levy of tax is separate on each of the persons. The levy is governed by
the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961. The Indian Income Tax Department is governed by CBDT and is part of the Department of Revenue
under the Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India. Income tax is a key source of funds that the government uses to fund its activities and
serve the public. The Income Tax Department is the biggest revenue mobilizer for the Government.
The Income Tax authorities are required to exercise their powers and perform their functions so as to prevent harassment of assesses,
tax-evasion, unnecessary discrimination in collection of tax. However, there have been a number of instances of misuse of these rule-
making powers which have the effect of contradicting statutory provisions that have been given binding effect, displacing the
authoritative pronouncements of the Higher Judiciary and causing an erosion of the constitutionally-mandated effect of Supreme Court
declarations under Article 141. In this scenario, for the purpose of effective financial management it becomes imperative to understand
the functioning, the powers and the limitation on the powers of these tax authorities. This paper talks about various tax authorities
under the Income Tax Act, appointment of income tax authorities, the Central Board of Direct Taxes and it’s powers, powers of other
Income Tax authorities, jurisdiction of the Income-Tax Authorities, and a conclusive analysis of the same.
(a) The Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Director or Deputy Director; or (b) The Income-tax Officer
who is vested with the relevant jurisdiction by virtue of directions or orders issued under section 120(1) or (2) or any other provision
of the Act; and
(c) The Additional Commissioner or Additional Director or Joint Commissioner or Joint Director who is directed under section 120(4)
(b) to exercise or perform all or any of the powers and functions conferred on, or assigned to, an Assessing Officer.
The Board, in addition, can relax any requirement contained in Sections 14 to 59 and 80A to 80U where the assessee has failed to
comply with any requirement. However, such default in the requirement was due to circumstances beyond their control or if the
assessee has complied with such a requirement before the completion of assessment in relation to the previous year in which such
deduction is claimed. Every such order is to be laid before each House of Parliament.
Moreover, the Board can exercise its powers to remove difficulties in the matter of Sections 201(1A), 210, 211, and 234C.
The Scope of the Rule- Making Powers of the Board Under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act:
The scope of the rule-making powers of the Board have been discussed below with respect to their binding value on the Revenue
Department, the assesses, the Courts/ Tribunals and the nature of the circulars.
Other cases have also reiterated that it is not open to the Revenue to argue against circulars issued by it: 'It cannot but urge the point of
view made binding by the...circular'. Similarly, in Mahavir Aluminium, the Supreme Court held the CBEC circular exempting
agricultural mechanical appliances from the payment of duty to be binding on the Board. The most recent case that deals with the
question of whether circulars issued by the CBEC shall be binding on the Department is India Cements. The Supreme Court, in 2011,
held that circulars issued for the purpose of providing sales tax deferral (to increase the production levels of industries in the State of
Tamil Nadu) that are not contrary to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 would be binding on the
Department. In the instant case, the circular did not conflict with either the statute or the scheme contemplated thereunder, and the
question of whether they shall be binding was thus inconsequential.
While the relevant provisions of various taxing statutes all suggest that circulars issued by taxing authorities shall be binding on
Department authorities, arguments are made that the extent to which these instructions and directions shall be binding must be
restricted in certain circumstances. Thus, the assessee can challenge the issuance of circulars, and adjudicatory authorities are also
afforded the flexibility to use their independent interpretations which may deviate from Department circulars.
A Full Bench in Uco Bank considered the effect of a certain circular issued under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 exempting
from income the interest payable on ‘sticky loans’, whose recovery is doubtful and has not been included in the profit and loss account
of the assessee. It stated: ‘Such instructions may be by way of relaxation of any of the provisions of the sections specified there or
otherwise. The Board thus has power, inter alia, to tone down the rigour of the law and ensure a fair enforcement of its provisions, by
issuing circulars in exercise of its statutory powers under Section 119 of the Income-tax Act which are binding on the authorities in the
administration of the Act. Under Section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assesses.’
Therefore, the settled position of law with regard to assesses is that they can challenge the circular if it has an adverse impact on them
that deviates from the statutory position.
In 2002, this decision was effectively overruled by a Constitution Bench requested in Dhiren Chemicals. Here, a notification had been
issued by the CBEC exempting certain products from excise duty, where duty was ‘already paid’ on the raw materials used in their
manufacture, thus preventing the payment of double duty. The construction of this exemption had, for some time, been the subject of
:
manufacture, thus preventing the payment of double duty. The construction of this exemption had, for some time, been the subject of
controversy, raising the question of whether imported raw materials which are either not liable to excise duty, or have the benefit
of nil duty payable, shall be included within the ambit of this notification. The CBEC had, consequently, issued a number of circulars
clarifying that the benefit shall not apply unless excise duty had actually been paid on the raw materials utilised. On the other hand, a
Full Bench of the Supreme Court had already, in Usha Martin, decided that the notification would apply even when a nil rate of duty
was applicable. Thus, the Court in Dhiren Chemicals was required to choose whether to follow the precedent set by its Full Bench
earlier, or the interpretation rendered by the CBEC circular issued in this regard. The Court ultimately held: 'We need to make it clear
that, regardless of the interpretation that we have placed on the said phrase, if there are circulars which have been issued by the
Central Board of Excise and Customs which place a different interpretation upon the said phrase, that interpretation will be binding on
the revenue.” This decision was the first to reflect a marked shift in the Judiciary’s perspective on the extent to which circulars issued
by the CBEC shall be binding. In effect, by holding the Department strictly to the position adopted by it in the circulars it issues, the
Court unwittingly weakened the impact of its own decisions by disregarding the interpretation of the Full Bench in Usha Martin in
favour of the interpretation rendered by the CBEC in the impugned order. This precedent-setting statement, negating the impact of the
decision rendered by a weaker bench earlier in Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd., was subsequently followed in 2004 in Maruti Foam, when
the Supreme Court reaffirmed that CBEC circulars shall be binding notwithstanding their conflict with the judgment rendered in Usha
Martin.
In Navnitlal Javeri, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court addressed the question of whether a circular issued by the Board of
Revenue, granting an exemption from income tax on genuine loans advanced by companies to their shareholders, would be binding on
the Board, notwithstanding that its contents violated the parent statute. Section 2(6A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made no distinction
between bona fide transactions and devices used for tax avoidance (by providing shareholders tax-free loans instead of taxable
dividends). The Court held that since the circular was conferring a benefit upon assessees and diluting the stringent requirements of
the Act, the Board was required to comply with its own instructions, and could not itself contend that the circular could not be
enforced. The decision in Navnitlal Javeri was affirmed by the Division Bench in Ellerman Lines, in which the impugned notification
laid down the principles to be followed in assessing the Indian income of foreign shipping companies. Accordingly, Ellerman Lines, a
British shipping company, was by the said notification assessed by way of a certificate issued by U.K. authorities (declaring the
income of the company), allowing an investment allowance which had been recognised by the Revenue in India as equivalent to the
development rebate made available under the Income Tax Act, 1922. Interestingly, the Court recognised the difficulties faced by
shipping companies in complying strictly with the income tax provisions of various countries in which they operate, and, as a result,
considered the notification, waiving strict compliance with the requirements of the Act, to be valid and binding on the Revenue
Commissioner (Appeals):
Commissioners of Income-Tax (Appeals) are appointed by the Central Government. It is an appellate authority vested with the
following judicial powers:
a. Power regarding discovery, production of evidence etc.
b. Power to call information.
c. Power to inspect registers of companies.
d. Power to set off refunds against tax remaining payable.
e. Power to dispose of appeals.
f. Power to impose penalty.
Joint Commissioners:
Joint Commissioners are appointed by the Central Government. The main function of the authority is to detect tax- evasion and
supervise subordinate officers. Under the different provisions of the Act, the Joint Commissioner enjoys the power to accord approval
to adopt fair market value as full consideration, instruct income tax officers, exercise powers of income tax officers, the power to call
information, to inspect registers of companies, to make any enquiry among other powers.
Income-Tax Officers:
While Income-Tax officers of Class I services are appointed by the Central Government, Income-tax Officers of Class II services are
appointed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax. Powers, functions and duties of Income-Tax officers are provided in many sections,
some of which are Power of search and seizure, Power of assessment, Power to call for information, Power of Survey etc.
Inspectors of Income-Tax:
They are appointed by the Commissioner of Income-Tax. Inspectors of Income-Tax have to perform such functions as are assigned to
them by the Commissioner or any other authority under whom they are appointed to work.
The Board can also authorize Director General or Chief Commissioner or Commissioner to issue orders in writing to the effect that the
functions conferred or assigned to the Assessing Officer in respect of the above four criteria shall be exercised or performed by Joint
Commissioner or Joint Director.
Also, the Assessing Officer has been vested with jurisdiction over any area or limits of such area -
1. If a person carries on business or profession only in that area. In respect of that person; or
2. If a person carries on business or profession in more than one place, then the principal place of business or profession situated in
that area; or
3. In respect of any other person residing within that area.
Any dispute relating to jurisdiction to assess any person by an Assessing Officer shall be determined by Director General /Chief
Commissioner/Commissioner of Income Tax If the dispute is relating to areas within the jurisdiction of different Director General
/Chief Commissioner/ Commissioner, then such issue is to be solved mutually among themselves. If the above authorities are not in
agreement among themselves such matter has to be decided by the Board or Director General/ Chief Commissioner/ Commissioner
authorized by the Board.
CONCLUSION:
It is believed that tax-authorities are independent judicial officers who are required to pass reasoned orders based on their own
reasoning un-influenced by instructions or advice from their superior officers. The Central Excise adjudication manual published in
1988 (that was its last publication), in para 39 directed that Board Orders and reference numbers should not be quoted in the
Adjudication Orders. It was further advised that Law Ministry’s opinion is confidential and should never be communicated in the same
language to even sub-ordinate officers. There are several Assistant Commissioners who boast “I am an adjudicating authority and not
bound by the Board orders”.
This has resulted in a considerable degree of uncertainty in financial management with respect to taxes. For example it is hard to
determine for the assesses, the binding value of circulars issued by CBDT under Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Also, these
circulars blatantly contradict statutory provisions that have been given binding effect, displace the authoritative pronouncements of the
Higher Judiciary and cause an erosion of the constitutionally-mandated effect of Supreme Court declarations under Article 141.
In recent times the catena of judicial pronouncements and statue provisions are creating quite a stir. However, there is still a need to
further define and redefine and implement the extent to which Income Tax authorities are required to exercise their powers and
perform their functions so as to prevent harassment of assesses, tax-evasion, unnecessary discrimination in collection of tax and to
help assesses effectively manage taxes.
REFERENCES:
· Text books.
1. Singhania, Vinod K., Direct Taxes: Law And Practise, 50th Edition 2013, New Delhi: Taxxman Publications Ltd.
2. Gururaj B.N., Guide to the Customs Act: Law, Practice And Procedure I, 2nd Edition 2005, New Delhi: Wadhwa and Co.
3. Chaturvedi and Pithisaria, Income Tax Law Volume 1, 5th Edition 1998, New Delhi: Lexis Nexis Butterworths
4. Sinha R.K., The Transfer Of Property Act, 4th Edition 1999, Central Law Agency.
5. Datar A.P., Guide to Central Excise, Law and Practice I, 6th Edition 2010, New Delhi: Wadhwa and Co.
Articles
1. M. Govindarajan, “CBEC Circulars/Orders/Instructions Relating to Service Tax”
(2008)availableat http://www.taxmanagementindia.com/visitor/detail_article.asp?ArticleID=199
2. Binding Nature of Board Circulars: Still Doubtful (2005), available at http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?
:
2. Binding Nature of Board Circulars: Still Doubtful (2005), available at http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?
filename=bnews_detail.php3andnewsid=1308
3. V. Ramaswami, "Binding Nature of CBDT/CBEC Circulars" 191 Current Tax Reporter 175 (2004)
Statues.
1. The Income Tax Act, 1961
Internet sources.
1. www.manupatra.com
Various Tax Authorities and their Powers under the Income Tax Act
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-1-5)
Author(s): Surbhi Gupta
Asian Journal of Management (AJM) is an international, peer-reviewed journal, devoted to managerial sciences. The aim of
AJM is to publish the relevant to applied management theory and practice...... Read more >>> (AboutJournal.aspx)
QUICK LINKS
LATEST ISSUES
POPULAR ARTICLES
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-1-5)
Various Tax Authorities and their Powers under the Income Tax Act
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-1-5)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-2-10)
Globalization and Indian Agriculture- General Consequences
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-2-10)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2011-2-4-12)
Power, Authority and Legitimacy
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2011-2-4-12)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-1-6)
Importance of Employee’s Attitude in an Organization
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2015-6-1-6)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2016-7-1-2)
An Analysis on Problems and Prospects of Indian Handicraft Sector
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2016-7-1-2)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-4-39)
:
Effect of Claim Settlement Practices on the Operating Efficiency and Profitability of Life
Insurance Companies of India- A Comparative Study of Public and Select Private Sector
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-4-39)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-2-4)
A Study on Customer Attitude towards Usage of Plastic Money in Sivakasi
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-2-4)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2018-9-3-17)
A Study on Credit Card usage behaviour in Mandya City
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2018-9-3-17)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-4-37)
Study of awareness about E-Payment among the people of Indore (Urban as well as Rural Area)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-4-37)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2012-3-4-2)
Regional Rural Banks: A result of Narasimham committee
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2012-3-4-2)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2016-7-3-11)
Factors Affecting the Performance of Private Label Brands in Indian Online Market: an
Assessment of Reliability and Validity
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2016-7-3-11)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2011-2-3-8)
Downturn’s Brunt: Indian Textile and Apparel Industry
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2011-2-3-8)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-2-6)
The Study of Marketing Mix on Different Stages of PLC and its Haze on DVD Players
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-2-6)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2018-9-1-78)
Review of Financial Performance analysis of Corporate Organizations
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2018-9-1-78)
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-3-9)
The Work of Indian Legend Chanakya in Context with the Modern Management
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2017-8-3-9)
:
Recent Articles
pproach
(AbstractView.aspx?PID=2024-15-1-1) (AbstractView.aspx?PID=2024-15-1-10)
Tags
VISITORS
Today: 734
Yesterday: 1232