9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (10) TMI 378 - HC - Income TaxExtension of time period of standing council of department after completion of the stipulated period of engagement Held that - A term for a period of three months can be extended by the Commissioner of Income Tax and as such his term was extended for a period of three months which has also elapsed. In these circumstances after expiry of the aforesaid extended period Standing council is conducting the cases without any proper authorization
Issues: Lack of proper authorization for representation by Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. Delay in renewal of term causing hindrance in administration of justice.
In this judgment by the Allahabad High Court, the issue at hand revolves around the lack of proper authorization for representation by a Senior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department. The Court was informed that the Counsel's term had expired, and despite attempts to return the briefs and seek renewal, no proper authorization was provided. This raised concerns about interference in the administration of justice due to the lack of assistance from the Revenue department. The Court emphasized the importance of timely actions and interim arrangements in such situations to avoid delays in legal proceedings. The Court expressed serious concern over the lackadaisical attitude of the concerned authorities and the potential interference in the administration of justice caused by the delay in renewing the Counsel's term. The judges highlighted the difficulty in deciding cases without proper assistance from the Revenue department. They noted that the Department should have made interim arrangements promptly, especially considering the high volume of appeals they handle daily. The Court emphasized that it was the duty of the authorities to inform relevant bodies about delays in issuing renewal orders to prevent such situations. As a result of the circumstances, the Court issued a directive for the concerned authorities, including the Chairman of the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the Secretary of Law and Justice, Government of India, to appear in person or designate senior officers to appear before the Court. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax in Lucknow and the Commissioner of Income Tax-I were also required to appear to clarify the situation and assist the Court. The registry of the Court was instructed to send copies of the order to the relevant authorities promptly for compliance and further action.
|
