Dealing with revenue-related backlog cases
Tuesday, 24 March 2009
THE revenue collection drive of the government often fails to meet its target due to various reasons that include non-cooperation of the taxpayers and laxity of the revenue officials in prevailing upon all those who are to pay taxes to do so properly and thereby perform their duty towards the state. Some taxpayers also take advantage of legal loopholes in an attempt to evade taxes. Notwithstanding these limitations, the government every year sets target for revenue collection and the fulfilment of the same always proves to be an uphill task.
Of late, the attention of the National Board of Revenue (NBR) has been drawn to a large number of revenue-related cases lying with the courts, pending verdict. The cases were filed by the taxpayers against the revenue department. As a result, the process of tax collection against these cases remained suspended in the middle of nowhere. On this score, the Chairman of the NBR the other day raised the issue of some 16372 cases awaiting decision in the different courts of the country. The total amount of revenue involved against these cases is estimated at Tk 65.42 billion. About 78 per cent of these cases are customs-related, while the rest involves income tax and Value Added Tax (VAT). However, the revenue related to income tax, which constitutes only 12.35 per cent of the cases, occupies 47.57 per cent of the entire amount of revenue remaining unrealised due to the aforementioned cases.
Admittedly, the responsibility of these cases filed with courts rests primarily with the people and the businesses involved with those. But a rather discomfiting aspect of the issue has to do with the role of the revenue officials involved in properly dealing with those cases. Were they totally helpless or did a section of them play an ambiguous role deliberately to facilitate institution of such cases? The NBR chairman himself has pointed to this side of the problem saying that it is due to the negligence of some revenue officials that the law officers at the Attorney General's office could not be supplied with the case-related documents in due time. The negligence on the part of the revenue officials in question has to do with both negligence and lack of proper orientation of the issue involved. It, therefore, becomes evident that a substantial amount of revenue thus remaining unrealised is in part due to the laxity, wilful or otherwise, of the revenue officials.
Reassuringly, the NBR authorities have decided to arrange an orientation course for the revenue officials on the legal aspects of the issue. Such orientation will hopefully help equip the revenue officials with necessary information and knowledge so that it might help expeditious disposal of the revenue-related cases lying with the different courts of the country. One cannot deny the importance of the necessary knowledge of the revenue officials on the various legal issues regarding the cases in question. That would certainly increase the efficiency of the tax officials. But apart from efficiency, there is yet another dimension to the problem. It is the very attitude of the government officials concerned. In fact, there is no alternative to honesty and dedication on the part of the officials in every sphere of administration, including the revenue department. In fact, this human aspect of the issue needs to be addressed with equal emphasis in the office, at the training centre as well as in the field in order to effect a qualitative change in the discharge of responsibility by the revenue officials.
Of late, the attention of the National Board of Revenue (NBR) has been drawn to a large number of revenue-related cases lying with the courts, pending verdict. The cases were filed by the taxpayers against the revenue department. As a result, the process of tax collection against these cases remained suspended in the middle of nowhere. On this score, the Chairman of the NBR the other day raised the issue of some 16372 cases awaiting decision in the different courts of the country. The total amount of revenue involved against these cases is estimated at Tk 65.42 billion. About 78 per cent of these cases are customs-related, while the rest involves income tax and Value Added Tax (VAT). However, the revenue related to income tax, which constitutes only 12.35 per cent of the cases, occupies 47.57 per cent of the entire amount of revenue remaining unrealised due to the aforementioned cases.
Admittedly, the responsibility of these cases filed with courts rests primarily with the people and the businesses involved with those. But a rather discomfiting aspect of the issue has to do with the role of the revenue officials involved in properly dealing with those cases. Were they totally helpless or did a section of them play an ambiguous role deliberately to facilitate institution of such cases? The NBR chairman himself has pointed to this side of the problem saying that it is due to the negligence of some revenue officials that the law officers at the Attorney General's office could not be supplied with the case-related documents in due time. The negligence on the part of the revenue officials in question has to do with both negligence and lack of proper orientation of the issue involved. It, therefore, becomes evident that a substantial amount of revenue thus remaining unrealised is in part due to the laxity, wilful or otherwise, of the revenue officials.
Reassuringly, the NBR authorities have decided to arrange an orientation course for the revenue officials on the legal aspects of the issue. Such orientation will hopefully help equip the revenue officials with necessary information and knowledge so that it might help expeditious disposal of the revenue-related cases lying with the different courts of the country. One cannot deny the importance of the necessary knowledge of the revenue officials on the various legal issues regarding the cases in question. That would certainly increase the efficiency of the tax officials. But apart from efficiency, there is yet another dimension to the problem. It is the very attitude of the government officials concerned. In fact, there is no alternative to honesty and dedication on the part of the officials in every sphere of administration, including the revenue department. In fact, this human aspect of the issue needs to be addressed with equal emphasis in the office, at the training centre as well as in the field in order to effect a qualitative change in the discharge of responsibility by the revenue officials.