Very interesting! The Govt measures of any nation cannot be attributed as a
balance of Justice; it is finding a shortcut in spite of the revenue loss
in order to barter something else. It is simply procedural. If the Govt
decides not to collect tax that is a way. fullstop. So only the country
going in appeal is a fallacy. Every country as a Judicial system in which
the plaintiff and the defendant gets the same opportunity to defend a case
. That is because the corrupt judges or aviveka judges are not
prostrated, in the interest of justice. What is justice is a matter of
dispute and under the cloud Maya. Dharmic and Justice are opposing each
other many times. Brian function is Justice; Mind function is Dharma.
Here assessments were made as chosen by the officers once; then due
to the pendency and the indiscriminate choice of selection for scrutiny the
corruption and time delay arose; then the summary assessments was
introduced; the loss of revenue and the tax evasion increased; then the
power of raids increased; those were misused; then the limitations for the
raids were raised; then thought by sampling revenue can be increased and
the sampling was by ind officer choice and because there were bad choices
given to the higher level to select etc; but whales escaped but tiny fish
were cooked. So these types of exercises are attempted by every country (
tax men are trained in the laws of the other countries also). Where there
is neutrality in Govt measures the result is obvious and surplus; but where
the good intentions are mauled by the select officers and the politicians,
the outcome is a problem ,seeking another solution; settlement commission
,appellate asst commissioner, income tax tribunal, sessions, middle, high
and supreme are routes rto escape by the whales even if the intentions are
good.
In USA tax man would visit the business premises where only the
representative can be present; there is no delay to brook in seeing the
evidences as all are available within a small territory; no machinery can
do Jeeboomba as narrated by a CA as they can be inspected while describing;
and the computation is made instantly and even before the order could arise
, prosecution can be filed and even arrested not from quantum money
involved alone but also on principles and the prosecution is vested with
only the federal court ; unless apoint of law is involved and until the
taxes are paid, one cannot go to the supreme court at all. The process is
finished faster than mind can think; Martha the wealthy lady was sent to
prison within 6 months (BED BATH & LINEN)/. England has no written
constitution and justice is rendered beyond the letters. Arabs lash. India
is a land of procrastination which people want hence the dravida and the
congress parties existing. Procedures are deceptive. KR IRS 28221
On Sun, 28 Feb 2021 at 10:18, Rangarajan T.N.C. <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
> Click here to download the tax policy paper 7
>
> <https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/tax/in-tax-deduction-and-collection-at-source-tax-policy-paper-7-noexp.pdf>
> Reducing income tax disputes in India - A way forward
>
> The income tax dispute resolution mechanism in India is multilayered and
> time consuming, affecting the environment for doing business in India. The
> country has an extensive tax appeals system that goes up to the Supreme
> Court of India.
> However, this system is subject to overuse. The income tax department is a
> major generator of tax appeals filed under the current dispute resolution
> procedure. Compared with other countries, India’s tax litigation numbers,
> pendency, and resolution times are significantly higher. India’s income tax
> department has a very low rate of success in its tax appeals compared with
> other countries. To address this issue, one of the measures the government
> has proposed is a direct tax dispute resolution scheme for pending tax
> appeal cases through a legislation, 'The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Bill
> 2020' introduced in Parliament. 'Vivad se Vishwas' translates to 'From
> Dispute to Trust'. In order to improve the current proposal in the Bill
> (which treats taxpayer and departmental appeals on the same footing for
> payment of disputed taxes), this paper suggests a graded system of taxes to
> be paid by the taxpayer in case of departmental appeals. A suggestion to
> reduce tax disputes in the future is to grant only the taxpayer (instead of
> both the taxpayer and the tax administration) the statutory right to file
> an appeal to a tax tribunal. This would be a step towards the government’s
> stated objective to build greater trust with taxpayers.
>
> https://www2.deloitte.com/in/en/pages/tax/articles/tax-policy-papers.html
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "societyforservingseniors" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To view this discussion on the web, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/2113840434.480221.1614487687705%40mail.yahoo.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/society4servingseniors/2113840434.480221.1614487687705%40mail.yahoo.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZorzZwRP6_AK1RVtqUKt60gqWSMNsMwyE6pgYqXi2WZH-w%40mail.gmail.com.
