Tale of growing CBI footprint on Tax Administration

Presently Tax Administration is mainly focused on Budget Collection rather than administration of Tax Laws. An impression is being created in the field that if Budget Collection Target is achieved , deficiency in other areas does not matter. So in filed right from Chief Commissioner to Inspector focus on achieving the Budget Collection of that particular financial year, as if the Department closes at the end of that financial year. Other areas of implementation, enforcement of tax laws and tax payers’s services are either postponed, ignored or compromised in that process. In the guise of achieving Budget Collection Target, huge refunds are held up, giving effect to appellate orders are delayed, high pitched assessment orders, raising huge disputable demands, are passed, higher discloser of income insisted in surveys etc. And most unfortunate is that senior officers involve and compel field officers in such unwarranted actions in the name of achievement of Budget Collection. Acquiescence on the part of senior officers in such actions, gives opportunity and liberty to filed officers to harass public. And it leads to intolerable grievances and also corruption.
Budget Collection, so far as concerned to field officers, shall not be the deterring target. Budget collection mainly depends upon the economical and social conditions of a particular area. And economical conditions vary from area to area and therefore increase of budget through out India cannot be of same percentage. Budget collection has to be handled and monitored at higher level considering the local economical conditions of a particular jurisdiction. So far as field officers concerned, Budget Collection shall be the ultimate result of proper enforcement and implementation of tax laws within their jurisdiction. Achievement of target by itself cannot be considered as proper enforcement and implementation of tax laws. And that is what happening in the present days. Though the budget collection is increased year after year, but implementation of tax laws and delivering of tax payers’ services are deteriorating. Number of non-filers, rectification applications and public grievances are mounting year after year. Mismatch of arrear demand and pendency of audit objections remain unaddressed for a long years. Even after a decade of computerization, demands on Systems and demand as per records are not matching. The reason is that field Officers (without adequate manpower) are busy through out year in following instructions and guidance of senior officers to monitor payment of advance tax by top tax payers (who in any case pay in consonance with current profit) , explaining short payment of advance tax by such top assessees, conducting surveys (mainly in top assessees) and completion of scrutiny assessments ( with a focus to raise huge demand to achieve budget collection) .
Till Ninety’s, seeking instructions (other than statutory instructions u/s 144A/144B) from a senior controlling officer in assessment and other statutory actions considered adversely against such an officer, being poor in legal issues. It was also considered as a breach of principles of natural justice and administrative laws. But in present days, it is not only appreciated but some senior officers expect and encourage oral discussions and seeking oral instructions.. Such an attitude from senior officers makes Field Officers not only indecisive and inefficiency in taking appropriate decisions at appropriate time, but also makes officers to yield to the pressure of senior officers. Legislative intention for making a provision u/s 133A for obtaining prior approval from the Range Head, for conducting survey u/s 133A, was to avoid misuse of the provisions and to avoid public harassment. But the Range Heads (in some cases Commissioners and Chief Commissioners) are substituting Assessing Officers to conduct surveys with the power vested for according prior approval. Unfortunately, this tendency from senior officers is also encouraged and appreciated at higher authorities being pro-active, without realization that such pro-active attitude results in exploitation later. If Senior Officers, who are supposed to control and monitor proper and fair conduct of a survey, themselves involve in conducting, taking disclosures and finalization of survey, where and to whom the tax payers shall approach for their grievances! In most of such cases interference and involvement of senior officers is off the records. And so, it makes a way for CBI to lay its footprint! Many a times a field officer following instructions of senior officers will be victim of such footprints!
V. G. IRKAL
Hospet

vasantirkal vasantirkal 18/08/2015