I
am happy to participate in this inaugural function of Platinum Jubilee
of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. As all of us are aware, this
Tribunal is the oldest quasi-judicial Tribunal set up prior to our date
of tryst with destiny. It is rightly termed as the Mother of all Tribunals.
However, ever since the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was set up in 1941 to
decide Income Tax cases under the Income Tax Act, 1922, the process of
tribunalization of the justice system has slowly but surely grown to cover more
and more areas of dispute100
resolution. The tribunals were established with the object of providing a
speedy, cheap and decentralized adjudication of cases arising out120 of the various welfare legislations.
Another important reason for the new development was that while the courts were
accustomed to dealing with cases primarily according to law, the exigencies
of modern administration require the adjudication of disputes not necessarily on
the basis of technical questions of law, but also after considering the
policy intentions and by a body manned by experts who could professionally and
fairly deal with the issues which required technical expertise.
Friends,
we are aware of the200 problem
of delays in the disposal of cases in courts and the backlog of litigation
continues to plague the credibility and effectiveness of
the judiciary. In India, the time taken by Courts to resolve disputes between
parties is significantly high240
whereas we have global examples like Singapore, where Courts on an average take
only about 125 days that is, just over four months. Tribunals were set up to
reduce pressure on the courts. Since the Tribunals are meant for speedy
justice, if it is not achieved, the continuance of Tribunals
would lack justification. One of the concerns expressed300 on efficacy of tribunals is that though
they were supposed to address the issue of delays and pendency in
the existing judicial system, they seem to be bogged down with the same
problems. Although there is no mandate for tribunals to follow the
procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, or to be bound by
the provisions of360 the Evidence
Act, it seems, tribunals still follow them, leading to delays and inefficiency.
Concerns have also been expressed on the quality of judgments delivered
by certain Tribunals. At the same time, the working of Tribunals has
been assailed on400
lack of independence also. The tribunals have been vested with the power of
reviewing or overseeing appeals from the actions of the Executive, except in
few cases when only the private parties are involved. Thus, the
requirement of independence and exhibiting higher standards of performance is
far greater in case of Tribunals.
The
hallmark of any institution depends upon the reputation which it builds
up over a period and the litmus test is in maintaining consistency of it
being fair480 and judicious,
apart from rendering speedy justice. In this regard, I must say
that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has500
steadily but consistently built up its reputation. I have noticed that
the Tribunal has a backlog of less than one lakh cases but a close examination
of the details reveals that broadly the appeals are disposed of within six
months to one year from the date of institution. Of course, there are
exceptions when cases are delayed on account of litigants. When all of you are
aware that the income tax law is a complex piece of legislation where there
have been frequent amendments year after year. Even for an expert
body like Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, there is a600 strong need for the Members and
practitioners to constantly update their knowledge to perform the functions
assigned to them in an effective manner. I would be glad to offer any
assistance if the Tribunal as an institution feels any necessity to upgrade
skills of its Members and comes up with a firm proposal in this regard.
Friends,
the objective of speedy justice cannot be achieved without active participation
of the Bar. The departmental representatives too need to extend their
co-operation so that the appeals are disposed of within the time frame. The
practice of seeking adjournments except when it becomes700 critical and vital, must be curbed. The
system of pre-trial hearings which is gaining popularity in developed
economies should be720 put to
use immediately. A major reform can be undertaken with digitalization of
documents and setting up of e-courts. We must get rid of the habit of using
paper. We must move in the direction of e-governance to provide the
litigants better services not only for case management, but also for
introducing effectiveness and efficiency in the litigation cycle. The
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal must conduct an internal evaluation of its
procedures and adopt suitable modifications for quick and800 time-bound disposal. I understand that
the Tribunal is already in the process of digitalization and paperless filing
of appeals. I am told that the first e-court was set up by the Tribunal
in 2012 at Mumbai840 to hear
the cases of Nagpur Bench and they are also in the process of setting up
e-courts in other places. It is a good measure. I am sure replication of
these measures will result into not only in saving time but also in taking
justice to the doorsteps of the litigants.
Last
but not the least, the courts have900 time and again observed that
the Government is the biggest litigant and hampering speedy justice in
genuine cases. Our Government has an objective of converting the Government
into a responsible litigant. A number of measures are being taken to reduce
the litigation from Government side. Recently the Central Board of Direct
Taxes issued a circular directing its officers to withdraw960 all the appeals from the Tribunal where
the tax effect is less than Rs. 10 lakhs. I am sure the Central Board of Direct
Taxes would come up with many more measures where the litigation can be
reduced, including by1000 not
filing appeals in small and routine matters. I am conscious of the fact that
the Tribunal is facing shortage of staff and Members and for most of the
time, it has functioned with 20 per cent shortage as compared to its sanctioned
strength of Members. Despite that, the Tribunal has tried to maintain a
healthy ratio between institution and disposal of appeals. I am also given to
understand that more than 80 per cent of the judgments rendered by1080 the Tribunal are accepted by the
litigants and even with regard to matters which are carried in appeal to
the1100 higher forums, orders
of the Tribunal are confirmed, barring a few instances. This indicates that the
Tribunal has maintained its rich tradition of rendering judicious and
well-reasoned orders. On my part, it is my endeavour to see to it that
the posts of Members and staff are filled up at the earliest so that the
Tribunal can render justice in full steam. I once again congratulate the
entire team of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for striving to come up to the
expectations of its stakeholders and maintaining the high standards. I
wish the institution all the best on the1200
occasion of its platinum jubilee and I thank all of you for giving me the
opportunity to be a part of this celebration.
