&w=3840&q=100)
FM Sitharaman flays tax officials, says OGE issuance delays 'unpardonable'
'After all the decisions are taken, the delay in OGE issuance is just not explainable. But we have a category—would you believe it? You have a category of OGE issuance delay. Why pray? The decisions are all done. You just have to issue the OGE. Unpardonable,' she said, addressing senior officials.
Reinforcing the need for accountability, she said that good policies alone are not enough. What matters, actually, is timely execution. Referring to the progress made in redrafting the Income Tax Act, she added, 'For a group or the CBDT, which is able to reduce five lakh words of the 1961 Act within a matter of three months to give me a draft bill which is half the size of that earlier 1961 Act… you're able to do that, but you can't issue OGEs? What's going on?'
Recalling the key action points from the June 2025 review, Sitharaman said: 'I would recall five of them (including the issue of OGE), which I would think are important for all of us to re-look at—not because things have changed from then to now, June 2025 to now, but to refresh ourselves that these were things which all of us spoke about together.'
The first, she said, is to 'accelerate disposal of disputed tax demands pending before the faceless appellate authorities and ensure timely resolution of litigation backlog.' Second, departments must 'identify and withdraw departmental appeals falling below the revised monetary threshold announced during the Union Budget 2024–2025 within the next three months.' The Union Budget 2024–25 raised the monetary thresholds for filing departmental appeals in tax-related cases, setting the new limits at ₹60 lakh for tribunals, ₹2 crore for High Courts, and ₹5 crore for the Supreme Court. These enhanced limits apply to disputes under Direct Taxes, as well as legacy cases in Excise and Service Tax.
The third priority is to 'ensure timely processing of tax refunds and proactive and timely resolution of taxpayer grievances,' said the Minister. Fourth, departments must 'analyse the grievances and devise strategies not only to resolve the existing pendency but also to address the challenges that are causing the grievances in the first place.' And fifth, Sitharaman said, is to 'undertake region-wise performance reviews to help identify factors hindering performance and streamline operations through indicators such as grievance disposal and orders giving effect issuance.'
Calling the Income Tax Day 'the moment when we reaffirm the unsaid social contract between the state and the taxpayer,' Sitharaman said this contract must not be allowed to 'fray at the edges' or 'become loose, become diluted.' She urged officials to raise the benchmark and ensure that the reform process is matched by efficient delivery on the ground.
In addition, the Finance Minister lauded the drafting of the new Income Tax Bill as the first-ever comprehensive review of the Income Tax Act since 1961. She said that several members of the select committee of the Lok Sabha had informally appreciated the drafting of the IT Bill 2025. She expressed hope that 'Parliament actually looks at the good work done… we will welcome the suggestions by honourable members and… expect with enough engagement, discussion, and debate in the House… this bill… passes through Parliament's scrutiny.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
29 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Will be vacating official residence on time post retirement: CJI BR Gavai
New Delhi, Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on Thursday said due to time constraints he would not be able to find a suitable house by the time he retires in November and "for sure vacate" his official residence within the time period allowed under the rules. Will be vacating official residence on time post retirement: CJI BR Gavai Bidding farewell to outgoing Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, who is set to superannuate on August 9, the CJI at an event organised by Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association called him a "warm person" who dedicated his career to the judiciary. Speaking to an audience comprising judges of the top court and high court aside from senior lawyers and their family members the CJI said Justice Dhulia would vacate his official residence, a day after his retirement. "We will always remember his contribution to the judiciary. After retirement, he is going to be in Delhi, and he'll be one of the judges who will be vacating the house immediately. On the next day of his retirement," the CJI said. Interestingly, a month ago in an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court administration wrote to the Centre to vacate the official residence of the Chief Justice of India at Krishna Menon Marg in Delhi, noting former CJI DY Chandrachud had stayed beyond the permissible period. Earlier in August, however, Justice Chandrachud vacated the official residence of the head of the judiciary. Referring to his and Justice Dhulia's situation, the CJI said, "As a matter of fact, that's a rarity. I wish I would also be in a position to do it till November 24. I won't find time to find a suitable house, but I can assure you that whatever time is permissible as per the rules, I'll be shifting before that. But Justice Dhulia has set a very good example. I am sure that many of us can emulate him." Justice Dhulia was a part of numerous judgements in the apex court, including the hijab ban case from Karnataka in which he dissented with the majority view and held there should be no restriction on the wearing of hijab anywhere in the schools and colleges of the state. When speakers lauded the verdict, Justice Dhulia said, "Let me tell you I was not defending the Hijab. What I was defending was the choice of women to wear Hijab. If I have a judicial philosophy, then I can only say that my judicial philosophy is everything is around the human being. Everything which is for the benefit of a human being is my judicial philosophy." The outgoing judge lauded the contributions of advocates-on-record and asked them to gear up for "their importance rises with the rise in litigation" and indicated that he would speak more on Friday, his last working day. In April, a bench headed by Justice Dhulia ruled Urdu language was born in this land and described it as the finest specimen of "Ganga Jamuni tahzeeb". The bench said considering it a language of Muslims was a "pitiable digression" from reality and unity in diversity. Justice Dhulia was born on August 10, 1960 and completed schooling in Dehradun, Allahabad and Lucknow. He was elevated as a permanent Judge of Uttarakhand High Court on November 1, 2008 and took oath as the Chief Justice of Gauhati High Court on January 10, 2021 before being elevated to the top court on May 9, 2022. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
29 minutes ago
- Business Standard
CJI not a mere post office, must uphold judicial transparency: SC
Defending the Chief Justice of India's authority to act on any judicial misconduct, the Supreme Court on Thursday said he couldn't be "merely a post office" but had the moral responsibility to ensure the judiciary functioned in a transparent, efficient and constitutionally appropriate manner. "We have no hesitation to say that the CJI is not a mere post office between the committee and the President/the Prime Minister that the report is to be forwarded without any remarks/recommendation. The CJI is clearly an important person, if not the most, in the larger scheme of maintaining institutional interest and credibility to ascertain whether a Judge has indulged in misconduct," the top court said. The observations came while deciding the plea of Allahabad High Court judge Yashwant Varma, against whom an SC-appointed expert panel filed a damning report over the discovery of burnt wads of cash from his official residence during his judgeship in Delhi. "As per the procedure, after receiving a complaint against a judge or a report from the Chief Justice of the High Court of which he is a Judge, the CJI has to apply his mind to the nature of complaint/report together with supporting materials, if any," a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih said. Observing procedure was scrupulously followed, the top court dismissed Varma's plea seeking invalidation of the in-house inquiry report finding him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery row. In its judgement, the apex court observed if the CJI believes the matter requires a deeper probe, he is required to constitute a committee for an in-house inquiry. "The report of inquiry may, or may not, find the allegations against the Judge to be serious, so as to call for any measure. However, if it does, the CJI is under an obligation to forward the report to the President and the Prime Minister. We see no justification to hold that in so forwarding, the CJI may not give his own views," the bench said. It went on, "The CJI bears a significant moral responsibility as the foremost judicial officer to ensure that the judiciary of the country functions in a transparent, efficient and constitutionally appropriate manner. Advising judges to be cautious and exercise discretion in judicial conduct, the top court said judicial officers in every rank, and more specifically, judges in the higher echelons of the judiciary "owe huge obligation" to the people of the country. "No judge, either of the Supreme Court or the High Courts, being above the law, acting in the discharge of his judicial or administrative/non-judicial or official duties in a manner attracting a possible complaint of not abiding by the restatement of values of judicial life (widely regarded now as the Code of Conduct for Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts) has to be shunned." While frivolous complaints of disgruntled litigants, lawyers among others couldn't be avoided, the top court said, the path of probity also could never be abandoned by a judge. "Any thought of there being absence of disciplinary measure other than removal by impeachment (which has never fructified over the years despite occasions calling for it) and therefore escaping unscathed despite committing a misbehaviour or indulging in bad conduct/misconduct, is what is normal, should be eschewed," it added. The apex court said with the advancement in science and technology and all other spheres of work, it was quite possible to bring to the CJI's notice how a particular judge might have conducted themselves inappropriately, attracting strict action. "Withdrawal of judicial work from a judge is an extreme measure that the procedure expressly permits. There are other measures too, which could be explored if judges are found to deviate from the Code of Conduct. The judges should, therefore, act cautiously and exercise their discretion wisely, to evade creation of a situation where initiating action becomes imperative," the verdict opined. The bench further pointed out that the judiciary in India was characterised by judicial independence, but such independence signified flexibility of judicial thought and the freedom to adjudicate without external and internal pressure and not unfettered liberty to act as one might wish. "Just as judicial independence is fundamental, so too is judicial accountability, compromising one compromises the other," the verdict added. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
ED can't act like 'crook', must work within four corners of law: SC
New Delhi: The Enforcement Directorate cannot act like a "crook" and has to confine itself within the four corners of the law, the Supreme Court on Thursday said as it flagged low conviction rates in cases investigated by the central agency. "We are also concerned for the image of the Enforcement Directorate," a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, N Kotiswar Singh said. The top court is hearing pleas seeking review of the 2022 verdict that upheld powers of arrest of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Additional Solicitor General S V Raju, appearing for the Centre and the ED, questioned the maintainability of the review petitions and attributed the low conviction rate to the delaying tactics of "influential accused". "Influential crooks have a lot of wherewithal. They employ a battery of lawyers to file applications after applications at different stages to protract the proceedings and the investigating officer of the case instead of devoting time to investigation keeps on running to court for one application or other," Raju said. Justice Bhuyan referred to one of his judgements and said of the 5,000 cases registered by the ED in past five years there were less than 10 per cent convictions and this factual statement was substantiated by the minister in Parliament. "You can't act like a crook, you have to act within the four corners of the law. I observed in one of my judgments that ED has registered around 5,000 ECIRs in the past five years but the conviction rate is less than 10 why we have been insisting that you improve your investigation as it deals with the liberty of the individual," Justice Bhuyan said. The judge continued, "We are also concerned about ED's image. At the end of 5-6 years of judicial custody, if people are acquitted, who will pay for this?" Justice Kant said the answer to all the problems was having dedicated courts akin to TADA and POTA courts and the dedicated PMLA courts could conduct day-to-day proceedings, resulting in expeditious disposal of cases. "Yes, influential accused will still file numerous applications but these accused and their lawyers will know that since it is day-to-day trial and their application will be decided the very next day. Time has come to hit them hard. We can't have sympathy for them. I know a magistrate who has to decide 49 applications in a day and pass orders for 10-20 pages in each of them. This cannot go on," he said. Raju further noted ED getting "handicapped" after "influential accused" flee to different countries like Cayman Islands aside from dealing in crypto-currencies and other sophisticated methods and impede investigation. On the point of crypto-currencies, Justice Kant said the government ought to seriously think of regulating it for people were operating different apps and crypto stock exchanges. He said top court's Justice Joymalya Bagchi recently said in a case that a day was not far when bribe takers would take bribes in crypto-currency, which will be very difficult for the investigating agencies to investigate. Raju questioned the authenticity of the review petitions, calling them "nothing but appeals" against the 2022 verdict disguised as review. "For the review, you have to make out a case for error apparent on the face of record in the 2022 verdict but they have not stated anywhere what is error apparent. If these reviews are admitted it would amount to rewriting the 2022 judgement," he said. Raju contended that the constitutional validity of the PMLA was in their favour as the Constitution bench in 2019 in the Roger Mathew case upheld the validity of the statute. "They (petitioners) took a chance and failed in that endeavour. Now they're saying, no, that was wrong and redo it. Review can't be an appeal in disguise. They must first demonstrate that there is an error apparent on the face of the record when it comes to these two issues. The error apparent on the face of the record should not be an error that should be fished out. Review cannot be for asking. They have to make out an exceptionally strong case for review," Raju said. Justice Kant also enquired about the methodology adopted by ED during arrests and whether grounds of arrest and reasons for arrests were given to the accused. Raju submitted there was no obligation on the ED under the statute to supply a copy of the ECIR (equivalent to an FIR) to the accused but courts in subsequent ruling stressed on sharing grounds and reasons of arrest with accused persons. The hearing would continue next week. In July 2022, the apex court in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary upheld the ED's powers to arrest, attach properties involved in money laundering and carry out search and seizure under the PMLA.
