TIOL-DDT 278 · the untouched capture
Rendered as it looked. Links and images are disabled in this view; the file itself is untouched.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body>
<div align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<strong><font color="#663399" size="3">TIOL-DDT 278</font><br>
06 01 2006<br>
Friday</strong></font></div>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>4
Appellate Commissioners for Vizag - Board corrects a terrible lapse - DDT’s
objection accepted after two months and huge damage</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">By
the office order No. 184/2005 Dated: 31st October, 2005, Board, had given additional
charge of the post of Commissioner (Appeals) to three Commissioners in Hyderabad.
<strong><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/inside2.php3?filename=bnews_detail.php3&newsid=2837">DDT
on 3.11.2005</a></strong> had pointed out that this order was patently illegal.
The relevant portions of the DDT are extracted here for ready reference.</font></p>
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td><p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Board
transfers old files of Vizag Commissioner (Appeals) to Hyderabad- by an
office order!</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The
office order issued by the Revenue Department states, “It has been
decided with the approval of <strong>Competent Authority</strong> that
the 3 Appellate Commissioner of Central Excise posted in Hyderabad zone
be given the additional charge of Commissioner (Appeal), Vizag with immediate
effect and until further orders” Cases pertaining to the year up
to 2002 are given to one Commissioner (Appeals), for the year 2003 to
another and the year 2004 to yet another Commissioner (Appeals). Who is
the <strong>Competent Authority</strong> whose approval the department
has taken? This order seems to be patently illegal. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">As
per Rule 3(2) 0f the Central Excise Rules,</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>(2)
The Board may, by notification, specify the jurisdiction of a Chief
Commissioner of Central Excise, Commissioner of Central Excise or <br>
Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) for the purposes of the Act
and the rules made there under.</em></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So
it is the Board which has to by notification specify the jurisdiction
of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Board had issued a Notification
No. 14/2002 CENT to specify the jurisdiction. This notification also specifies
that</font></p>
<blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><em>Provided
that a Chief Commissioner of Central Excise may, within his jurisdiction,
specify, the jurisdiction of a Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals)
and jurisdiction of such Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) shall
be limited to the jurisdiction so specified.</em></font></p>
</blockquote>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">So
if the Chief Commissioner wants, the jurisdiction of a Commissioner (Appeals)
can be changed. But there doesn’t seem to be a provision under the
law for appointing Commissioners (Appeals) by office orders without amending
the relevant notifications.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>The
real problem is that cadre review has created several posts of Commissioner
(Appeals) and they all want to be posted in cities like Hyderabad and
not small places like Vizag! Even as per the Board’s statistics
there are more than 400 appeals pending in Vizag with only one Commissioner(Appeals)
while there are less than a hundred appeals pending in Hyderabad which
has three Commissioners (Appeals). Is there anything called accountability???</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Department
of Revenue Office Order No. 184/2005 Dated: 31st October, 2005</font></p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Though
<strong>DDT</strong> had pointed out, on 3rd November 2005, that the only way
to send those three Commissioners to Vizag was by amending the notification,
the Board took exactly two months to do the amends. It is heartening to see
the Board correcting a mistake, a gross one at that. But at what cost? In the
last two months the three commissioners of Hyderabad and the litigants and their
lawyers did a lot of flying around to and from Vizag - for what? For hearings
which were illegal and without authority and jurisdiction! All the hearings
given by the three Hyderabad Commissioners for Vizag cases are illegal and improper
and so all the orders passed by them would also be void. How much money and
time both public and private were wasted because Board does not know how to
give effect to their legislative intentions and they don’t react quick
enough? If some junior babu had done this kind of mistake the might of the Board
would have fallen on him, but Board is Board and above board. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Now
Board has amended Notification No. 14/2002-Central Excise (N.T.) by the first
Central Excise notification of the year appointing four Commissioners (Appeals)
and specifying their jurisdiction. </font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>But
does this solve the problem?</strong> Unfortunately the answer is <strong>NO</strong>.
The posts of four Commissioners (Appeals) have been notified for Vizag but posting
Commissioners has not yet been done. Until then those Vizag cases cannot be
heard by any one. As of now the situation is that though the statute has four
Commissioners (Appeals) in Vizag there is no Commissioner there physically.
This has another related problem. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals),
Vizag is also the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). Notification No. 16/2002-Cus.
(N.T.), dated 7-3-2002 deals with the appointment of Commissioner of Customs
(Appeals). Unless that notification is also amended or one (or all) of these
four commissioners is also given jurisdiction as Commissioner of Customs (Appeals),
there will be no appellate Commissioner for Customs in Vizag. Too many notifications;
too many commissioners - it is really difficult to monitor for the Board. Let’s
hope the Board will not wait for another couple of months to rectify these lapses.
</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><a href="http://www.taxindiaonline.com/RC2/subCatDesc.php3?subCatDisp_Id=30&filename=notification/excise/2006/exnt06_01.htm"><strong>NOTIFICATION
NO. 1/2006 - Central Excise (NT), Dated: January 3, 2006</strong></a></font></p>
<p align="center"><font color="#006600" size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>Taxes
- I am not interested!</strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">The
following letter was sent to the Collector of Taxes in Harare, Zimbabwe, and
later printed in the Cape Times.</font></p>
<table width="450" border="1" align="center" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td><p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dear
Sir,</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">I
have to refer to the attached form. I regret so grave I am unable to complete
the form as I do not know what is meant by filling this form. However,
I am not interested in this income service. Would you please cancel my
name from your books as this service has upset my mind and I do not know
who has registered me as one of your customers.</font></p>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yours
faithfully, <br>
</font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">...
</font></p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong><font color="#FF6666">Until
Monday with more DDT</font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Have
a nice Weekend. </font></strong></font></p>
<p align="justify"><font color="#FF6666"><strong><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">Mail
your comments to</font></strong></font><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">
<a href="mailto:vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com">vijaywrite@taxindiaonline.com</a></font></p>
</body>
</html>