9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 1228 - Tri - Indian LawsLegality of promotion to the cadre of ACIT on the basis of All India level seniority list pertaining to the cadre of Income Tax Officers (ITO) - Held that - There exists no All India seniority list pertaining to the cadre of ITOs based on the principles/ directions of the Hon ble Supreme Court in N.R.Parmar (2012 (12) TMI 872 - SUPREME COURT ). The fact that the cadre of ITO is a feeder cadre for promotion to the cadre of ACIT cannot be disputed. We find some considerable force in the argument of Shri M.S.Trivedi that if the respondents were to effect promotion to the cadre of ACIT on the basis of the existing All India level seniority list of ITOs as on 01.01.2012 (pre-Parmar) circulated through the letter dated 01.09.2015 vide Annexure A/1 there is likelihood of some of the ITOs who were given deemed date of eligibility based on the decision of N.R.Parmar (supra) may be out of the zone of consideration for promotion to the cadre of ACIT but the fact remains that All India level seniority list is yet to be finalised and published. As the matter is sub judice before the Hon ble High Court of Gujarat wherein order says Hence the status quo as on date be continued qua promotions from the cadre of Income Tax Officers to Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax . As such we are not supposed to deal with the prayer of the applicant in this O.A. subject to the order that may be passed by the Hon ble High Court in the matters pending before it pertaining to publication of All India Level seniority list of ITOs and promotion to the cadre of ACITs. However we may observe that the applicant is at liberty to approach the Tribunal as and when circumstances warrant. In terms of the above observations the O.A. stands disposed of.
Issues:
1. Challenge to promotion process for Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax based on seniority list. 2. Alleged illegal promotion process based on All India seniority list of Income Tax Officers. 3. Non-interpolation of applicant's name in All India seniority list. 4. Proposed convening of DPC for promotion to ACIT. 5. Relief sought by the applicant. 6. Compliance with Supreme Court decision in N.R. Parmar case. 7. Order of the High Court of Gujarat regarding promotions. Analysis: 1. The applicant challenged the promotion process for Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (ACIT) initiated by the respondents based on the seniority list dated 01.09.2015. The applicant claimed the process was illegal and contrary to the Supreme Court judgment in the case of Union of India v. N.R. Parmar. 2. The applicant, who joined the Income Tax Department in 1996 as an Inspector of Income Tax (ITI) and was later promoted to Income Tax Officer (ITO) in 2006, argued that the promotion process to ACIT based on the All India seniority list of ITOs was illegal. 3. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad, issued orders assigning deemed promotion dates to certain officials as ITOs with retrospective effect. However, the applicant's name was not interpolated in the All India seniority list of ITOs despite being assigned seniority from 12.01.2004 in the Gujarat Region. 4. The respondents were proposing to convene a DPC for promotion to ACIT for the panel year 2016-17. The applicant sought relief to quash the promotion process based on the seniority list dated 01.09.2015 and to direct the interpolation of his name in the seniority list. 5. The applicant requested the Tribunal to allow the petition, quash the impugned action, direct interpolation of his name, and grant any other just relief. 6. The Tribunal noted the absence of an All India seniority list for ITOs based on the principles of the Supreme Court judgment in N.R. Parmar. The Tribunal acknowledged the feeder cadre relationship between ITOs and ACITs. 7. The Tribunal considered the High Court of Gujarat's order maintaining the status quo regarding promotions from ITOs to ACITs. The matter was deemed sub judice before the High Court, and the Tribunal disposed of the case without costs, allowing the applicant to approach the Tribunal as needed based on future developments in the High Court.
|
