Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter:

CBDT Chief Fumes At Low Tax Recovery & Demands Stern Recovery Measures To Be Adopted By AOs

Hon’ble Sushil Chandra, the Chairman of the CBDT, has issued a directive dated 17.03.2017 in which he has made his displeasure at the “unsatisfactory performance in the area of recovery” very clear.

The learned Chairman has relied on facts and figures and stated that the achievement in some regions “is even worse than the national average, which itself is very low”. He has also argued that the collections till February 2017 have a “miserably low ratio”.

At the end, the learned Chairman has directed that “maximum amount of confirmed demand must be recovered immediately”. He has also directed all AOs and TROs to make “concerted efforts towards recoveries from arrear and current demands” so that the targets are met without fail.

11 comments on “CBDT Chief Fumes At Low Tax Recovery & Demands Stern Recovery Measures To Be Adopted By AOs
  1. waghela B.S. says:

    Allow me to correct you. Appeals filed in FY 2002-03 are still pending before CIT(As) in spite of more than a dozen hearings. Some were waiting for money and some were incapable of taking decisions.

  2. Bobjee Kurien says:

    There is no need to fume .The administrative officers (all of the being IRS)have only time to see their seniority and nothing more.Barring a few none of the IRS is inclined to work .They like to boss over their juniors and make them a source for their income.
    Has any higher ranked officer looked into the fate of the high demand /high pitched assessments? They always like an officer who makes a high pitched assessment .There lies the money
    How is it that no one analysed the high pitched assessment and the final result thereof .Why not hold the additional CIT responsible for the assessments.for he is the authority to give the clearance for all assessments and has concurrent jurisdiction .
    What are the steps taken by the CsIT or CCITs to reduce the arrears .Was the Chairman CBDT sleeping over all this while .
    I hold the CBDT Chairman responsible for all the ills of the departments He need not fume.Once upon a time he was also an assessing officer

    • waghela B.S. says:

      Yes Bobjee, you are correct. Most of the present day Addl.CITs/CITs do not know the Incometax Law. Most of them are dependent upon the Note-sheets written by their TAs/Inspectors. They have got promotions because of seniority and not merit.

  3. Varaprasad Daitha says:

    The arrears of more than Rs. 1 lakh are monitored by the range head through monthly dossier reports by each AO. nSo also the arrears of more than Rs. 10 lalhs more than Rs. 1 Crore and more than Rs. 20 Crores will be sent to Principal CIT, Chief CIT and CBDT respectively. Are all the authorities are to be taken as sleeping over such reports? Certainly not. The so called “unsatisfactory performance in the area of recovery” clearly speaks of his ignorance or failure of the system. Without finding or isolation of the causes or failures expression of fury is not a welcome action.

  4. ST says:

    What about the CBDT’s stands in taking and disposing the appeals? Why there is so delay in taking the appeals? Appeals filed in 2014 are still pending for hearing before CIT(A). If the appeals are taken and disposed promptly and timely, one will find substantial reduction in demand since most of the demands are bogus. What about the time limit of disposal of remand matters? The entire government system is corrupted and working unwisely.

  5. Unreasonable and high pitched assessment orders and subsequent stays of demands are one of the factors that contribute to poor recovery performance.

  6. Varaprasad Daitha says:

    It is another run out of mill circulars. If he had been so sour of poor performance in this front why he was oblivious all these waiting for what? Did any one precluded him from reviewing all these days? From 2001-2002 all functions were clubbed into assessment ranges and headed by Addl / Jt. CITs. There is a system of monthly DOs from ranges to the level of CBDT and all the authorities had to review the summary of performance and write back to the lower authorities their comments. Did the CBDT chief ever write return DOs to lower authorities?

    • b.s.waghela says:

      Under the Income tax Act, TROs have more powers than the Collector of the District(SDM). But these powers are not being used. Main reason is that unwanted persons, who have no inclination to work, are posted as TROs. Every ITO/ACIT wants a lucrative posting where he may earn or harass without taking hard decisions. How many TROs have put tax-defaulters in civil prison during the last 50 years ? possibly none. As an AO I attended Regional Write Off Committee in 1975. Thereafter I attended such Committees twice with the same cases and same set of facts. Since then more than 42 years have elapsed and I have also retired, but not a single penny has been written off. Reasons : CCITs/CITs are not simply interested in such work. Why the CBDT is not taking any action against these shirkers under Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules ?

  7. Deepk Soni says:

    The chairman shall be well advised if he gives the instructions to his subordinate to frame the assessment orders strictly in consonance with the facts and provisions of law.The AO many times on their own and on several occasions under the instructions of higher authorities and under pressure of the audit department are framing high pitched assessments leading to raising of huge demands which are substantially reduced in the appeals.It is a big vicious circle where everyone is unproductively busy right from the AO to the Ca and the appellate authorities.The only party at the disadvantage is the tax payer.

  8. gopal nathani says:

    Mr. Chairman Sir,
    Couple of suggestions

    1. Each Principal Commissioner of Income tax must send a letter under his signatures directly to the Proprietor, Director, partner or principal officer stating clearly the outstanding demands, separately as current demand and arrear demand, against the assessee along with the implications of not paying up the taxes under the law viz, burden of interest @ —-, penalty @ —-and prosecution for —–years besides attachment of assets.
    2. Such cimmunique to also state that by not payment taxes in the present and in the event of appellate authority hold against the assessee there would be charge of interest @ 18% from day one which is not tax deductible meaning that there would be an additional cost of 26% appx for non payment of current taxes.
    3. Also the principal officer be informed that in the event of refund of tax upon favourable decision by appellate authority the Government is bound to pay interest at 6 % on such amount from the date of payment.

    This communication from the highest authority will certainly make an impression upon the assessee to pay taxes at the earliest.

    Gopal Nathani

Leave a Reply



