[Faceless appeal scheme] If Centre can make statement in Supreme Court, why not here: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Friday adjourned hearing in the plea challenging the Faceless Appeal Scheme in order to enable the Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh to confirm whether a statement on staying hearings under the scheme was made before the Supreme Court..A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice MS Karnik was informed that during the hearing of transfer petitions in Supreme Court, the ASG who appeared before the top court had made a statement that all appeal hearings under the faceless appeal scheme will be kept in abeyance, in light of the submission that the scheme was being reconsidered in the parliament's winter session..CJ Datta then asked why a similar statement could not be made before the Bombay High Court too.ASG Singh sought time to confirm with the ASG in Delhi on whether to give a similar undertaking or proceed with arguments in the matter.The matter was adjourned for further consideration on December 14.The Court was hearing a plea filed by Chamber of Tax Consultants challenging two notifications issued in 2020 by which the scheme was rolled out, and Section 250 subsections (6B), (6C) and (6D) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that the same are arbitrary and in excess jurisdiction and authority..During the hearing of the case on Friday, the ASG apprised the Court of the number of appeals which had been disposed of under the faceless scheme and the number of appellants who requested for a personal hearing.ASG said that the appeal units had received only 580 applications for personal hearing until date. On Monday, the ASG had submitted that over 56,100 matters had been disposed of and only one among them had sought personal hearing..Since the number seemed to be small in comparison to the majority who were not objecting to proceeding under the scheme, he requested the Court to pass an order that those 580 applications ought not be heard till the parliament takes a decision..Senior Advocate Arvind Datar appearing for the petitioner, objected to the figures submitted by the ASG. He stated that as per the statement before the Supreme Court, no appeals were being heard at all and not even notices for hearings were being issued.The statement which the ASG submitted on the number of appeals which have been disposed of seemed contrary to that submission, Datar said..Additionally he argued that winter session was soon getting over, but there did not seem to be any bill pertaining to the faceless scheme.The ASG replied that irrespective of whether the bill is tabled or not, the Centre will have to answer to the Supreme Court as well. In the meantime, an order could be passed protecting those who do not want to be included in the scheme and the other majority who seemed happy with the scheme, could continue with the scheme..The Court also asked Datar to respond as to why the Court should interfere with respect to those who are not aggrieved by the scheme.“Your private matter was converted into a PIL based on the nature of reliefs sought. But we do not see any assessees coming before us with grievance. Why should we interfere if the assessees are happy with the scheme? If anyone has any grievance they can approach us with their grievance..” the Bench said..Datar emphasized that the present PIL raises a question of rule of law. The petitioner has over 3,000 members and instead of having multiple petitions filed and clubbed, it was deemed fit to file a single petition.He reiterated that hearing on the scheme was not the only concern, as the manner in which the amendment under the Income Tax Act was brought about was under question.