GST Implementation Report

By Vijay Kumar

STAFFING Pattern - (4.9.3) In the Conference it was also pointed out that the staffing pattern in the State Government and CBEC is different. The organizational structure in the State is bottom heavy whereas in the case of CBEC it is the reverse case. Concern was expressed as to how synergy would be established between Centre and States in the GST scenario. As per the data available from some of the States, total number of staff available at Gr. B,C, & D in some of the States is 3-5 times more than the staff available in Central excise & Service Tax Commissionerates in that State. On this point, the Group felt that the best management practices followed internationally is to make the organization officer-oriented with the extensive use of IT infrastructure.

Gradually, the business processes should be IT- enabled and officers at senior level should be able to devote more time on analysis. Therefore, the organizational structure followed by CBEC is found to be better and more effective. In course of time, the States may chose the model that best suits their requirement.

The organisation structure of CBEC has become top heavy with the cadre restructuring aimed at only creating more unnecessary posts with the aim of giving promotions. In the present structure, absolutely there is no requirement of having posts of Additional Commissioners and Joint Commissioners who do nothing in head-quarters except adding to the delay as the files will have to be routed through them. Instead of emulating the successful structure followed by the State Governments, ( Bottom heavy and top light, where we find only a few top officials ably administering the tax collections of the State) the report tried to spoil the structure of State Governments by advising them to emulate CBEC model. The report of the group claims their model as effective and is in tune with the best management practices followed internationally, to make the organisation officer oriented. However, the CBEC structure cannot be equated with the international model for the simple reason that they have a very little understanding of the field work - if they are given an ER 1 form or ST 3 form and a test is conducted, many of them would fail to fill the ER 1 / ST 3 returns correctly on their own. The sooner the CBEC stops glorifying their top heavy structure, the better. For god's sake at least please do not spoil the successful State Models with your unwanted theories.

The so called better and more effective organizational structure followed by the CBEC is now like this; With cadre review and promotion as the only goal, Sepoys have become Superintendents; many of the inspectors are illiterate; post of Data Entry operators have been abolished and in every building you find at least two- three Commissioners. In a typical State you will find the Staff Strength in the Central Excise and VAT departments like this.

Now if we are targeting the same assessees under GST, how are we going to integrate these two sets of officers?