Political Sensitivity in Tax matters?:
What is further troubling is the introduction of 'political sensitivity'. In fact, the request letter of the Board does not specifically invoke this concept. It is the Vice President who has introduced this concept. This concept is then carried forward by the Regular Bench and during the arguments before us. We fail to understand how 'political sensitivity' is relevant in a tax litigation. Tax is levied and collected under the sovereign power of the State. The Revenue is entrusted with collecting the tax and employs all legitimate methods to bring the tax evaders to book. The Tribunal is established to adjudicate disputes arising from the application of the Act. In the scheme of the Act, political affiliation of an assessee is irrelevant. The Vice President thought the case was politically sensitive. This was after the private meeting with the representative of the Board. So are we to presume that politics was discussed in the meeting? The Vice President has sown a seed of an irrelevant and potentially dangerous concept in the income tax litigation. Consider a converse scenario. There could be situation where an assessee may send its representative to hold a private meeting to refer the entire matter to special bench because the result before regular bench may affect his political career or that the issue in his case is politically sensitive. We therefore strongly deprecate the invocation of this criterion. The collection of tax and the adjudication must move unconcerned with political identity.
ITAT: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is one of the oldest and most reputed tribunals in the country. Looking at its composition, high standards of conduct are naturally expected. It is of utmost importance that the faith of the litigants in the Tribunal is maintained. Procedural justice is an important facet in the administration of justice. That justice must not only be done but also seen to have done, is not a cliché but is one of the most basic principles.