analysis of appeals dec 2011 31.5.2012

23
Analysis of Disposal of Appeals by CsIT(A) (upto Dec. 2011) Research and Statistics Wing DGIT(Logistics) 1

Upload: jena01

Post on 21-Jul-2016

3 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

rqwrqr

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

1

Analysis of Disposal of Appeals by CsIT(A)

(upto Dec. 2011)

Research and Statistics WingDGIT(Logistics)

Page 2: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

2

Classification of Appeals

Instituted Prior to 1.4.2010

Instituted between 1.4.2010

and 31.3.2011

Instituted during current year

between 1.4.2011 and 31.3.2012

High Demand Appeals

B1A B1B B4A

Other Appeals B2 B3 B4B

Page 3: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Resources

MZ35

14% NZ54

22%

WZ56

23%

EZ29

12%

SZ40

17%

CC28

12%

No. of CsIT(A)

Page 4: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Overview

• OB: 1.88 lakh appeals and Rs 1.98 lakh crore • New institution: 59000 appeals• Workload: 2.47 lakh appeals• Disposal: 53000 appeals• Pendency:1.94 lakh appeals• Pending demand: Rs. 2.53 lakh crore• Excess: 6000 appeals and Rs. 0.55 lakh crore

Page 5: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Workload

• Not Uniform but ranging from 6102 with CIT(A)-14 Mumbai to 32 with CIT(A)-30 Delhi

• Only six CsIT(A) having more than 2500 appeals• Removing these outliers (!!!), the average

workload falls from 1019 to 959 per CIT(A) or about 5 appeals per CIT(A) per day

• High Demand Appeals constitute about 22% • One fourth of the New appeals are HD appeals

Page 6: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Top 10 CsIT(A) with maximum Workload

Bottom 10 CsIT(A) with minimum Workload

CsIT(A) Workload

CsIT(A) Workload

CIT (A) -14 Mumbai 6102 CIT (A) - 30 Delhi 32CIT (A) -2 Kanpur 3366 CIT (A) -Siliguri 139CIT (A)-1 Patna & Muz.Pur 3017 CIT (A) - 20 Delhi 211CIT (A) - 3 Chennai 2804 CIT (A) - LTU Chennai 232CIT (A) - Bareilly 2548 CIT (A) - 4 Bangalore 284CIT (A) - 1 Kolkata 2537 CIT (A) - 3 Rajkot 297CIT (A) - Ghaziabad 2478 CIT (A) - 6 Delhi 317CIT (A) - 1 Ludhiana 2415 CIT (A) -Durgapur 342CIT (A) – 12 Kolkata 2323 CIT (A) -Durgapur 342CIT (A) - 1 Indore 2264 CIT (A) -15 Mumbai 375

Top and Bottom 10 CsIT(A) in Workload

Page 7: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Disposal

• Progressive Disposal: 53145 appeals • High Demand appeals: 15972 (30%)• Disposal Rate: 24 appeals per CIT(A) per month• CIT(A)-1, Nasik and CIT(A), Raipur disposed the

maximum of 580 and 544 appeals respectively. • CsIT(A) of Ranchi and Gurgaon not disposed any

appeal in the last nine months. • CIT(A) LTU, Delhi not forwarding any data and hence

the disposal is taken as nil.

Page 8: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Progressive Disposal

16

23

29

36 35

48

32

13

7

1 1 1

Appeals Disposed

CsIT(A)

Page 9: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Top 10 CsIT(A) with maximum Disposal

Bottom 10 CsIT(A) with minimum Disposal

CsIT(A) Disposal CsIT(A) Disposal

CIT (A) 1 - Nashik 580 CIT (A) – Ranchi, Gurgaon & LTU Delhi 0

CIT (A) - Raipur 544 CIT (A) -4 Kochi 4CIT (A) - Panchkula 467 CIT (A) -Siliguri 7CIT (A) -2 Dehradun 433 CIT (A) - 30 Delhi 11CIT (A) - Rohtak 430 CIT (A) - Salem 21CIT (A) - 41 Mumbai 429 CIT (A) - Vijayawada 23

CIT (A) - 2 Lucknow 426 CIT (A) – Shillong & Trivandrum-1 24

CIT (A) 2 - Nashik 415 CIT (A) - 2 (C) East Kolkata 34CIT (A) -3 Jaipur 409 CIT (A) – Asansol 39CIT (A) - Muzaffarnagar 408 CIT (A) -10 Delhi 39

Top and Bottom 10 CsIT(A) in Disposal

Page 10: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Month-wise Disposal of AppealsMonth Disposal During

the MonthProgressive Disposal

No. Average per

CIT(A)

No. Average per CIT(A)

Average per CIT(A) per month

April 2011 2833 12 2833 12 12May 2011 3802 16 6738 28 14June 2011 5496 23 11420 47 16July 2011 6304 26 18436 76 19Aug. 2011 6123 25 25048 103 21Sep. 2011 6880 28 32256 132 22Oct. 2011 6433 27 38847 162 23Nov. 2011 7480 31 46359 192 24Dec. 2011 7186 30 53145 220 24

Page 11: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Pendency of Appeals

• Pendency : 1.94 lakh appeals • Not uniformly distributed among the CsIT(A)• Ranges from 5809 with CIT(A)-14, Mumbai to 21

with CIT(A)-30, Delhi • Average pendency at the end of December 2011 is

800 appeals per CIT(A)• Share of HD Appeals in pendency: 19%• First nine out of the top 10 CsIT(A) with maximum

workload have the maximum pendency

Page 12: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Top and Bottom 10 CsIT(A) in PendencyTop 10 CsIT(A) with maximum

PendencyBottom 10 CsIT(A) with

minimum PendencyCsIT(A) Pendency CsIT(A) Pendency

CIT (A) -14 Mumbai 5809 CIT (A) - 30 Delhi 21CIT (A) -2 Kanpur 3112 CIT (A) - 1 Surat &

CIT(A) Siliguri 132CIT (A)-1 Patna & Muz.Pur 2966 CIT (A) -3

Ahmedabad 136CIT (A) - 3 Chennai 2536 CIT (A) - 19 kolkata 144CIT (A) - Bareilly 2328 CIT (A) - 20 Delhi 145CIT (A) - 1 Kolkata 2237 CIT (A) -2 Dehradun 156CIT (A) - 12 kolkata 2175 CIT (A) - LTU Chennai 158CIT (A) - Ghaziabad 2142 CIT (A) - 6 Delhi 168CIT (A) - 1 Ludhiana 2105 CIT (A) -21 Mumbai 186CIT (A) - Ujjain 2048 CIT (A) -18 Mumbai 199

Page 13: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Disputed Demand

• Pending disputed demand: Rs. 2.53 lakh crore• Share of High Demand Appeals: 86%• Skewed distribution ranging from Rs. 81634 crore with

CIT(A)-40, Mumbai to Rs. 61 lakh with CIT(A), Valsad• Only five CsIT(A) having the disputed demand more

than Rs. 10000 crore• Segregating them for customized treatment, average

demand disputed falls to Rs. 536 crore from Rs. 1045 crore per CIT(A)

Page 14: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Top and Bottom 10 CsIT(A) with Disputed Demand

Top 10 CsIT(A) with maximum Disputed Demand

Bottom 10 CsIT(A) with minimum Disputed Demand

CsIT(A)Disputed Demand

(Rs. Crore)CsIT(A)

Disputed Demand

(Rs. Crore)CIT (A) - 40 Mumbai 81634 CIT (A) - Valsad 0.61CIT (A) -2 Mumbai 12409 CIT (A) - 33 kolkata 0.62CIT (A) -5 Mumbai 11398 CIT (A) -1

Ahmedabad 1.93CIT (A) -11 Mumbai 10232 CIT (A) - 33 Delhi 6.72CIT (A) -14 Mumbai 10134 CIT (A) - Varanasi 9.33CIT (A) -15 Mumbai 7352 CIT (A) - Jamnagar 10.08CIT (A) - 1 Jabalpur 4384 CIT (A) -Siliguri 10.60CIT (A) -6 Mumbai 4199 CIT (A) -Durgapur 10.99CIT (A) - 3 Bangalore 3815 CIT (A) -3

Ahmedabad 15.74CIT (A) - 18 Delhi 3649 CIT (A) - 16 kolkata 16.19

Page 15: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

CsIT(A) with Disputed Demand68

3236

1914

9 95

85

17

2

8

26

Rs. Crore

28% CsIT(A) have less than Rs. 100 crore85% of the CsIT(A) have less than Rs. 1000 crore

35 CsIT(A) have more than Rs. 1000 crore5 CsIT(A) with more than Rs. 10000 crore

Page 16: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

-50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

No.

of A

ppea

ls

CsIT(A)

Pendency and Demand LockedCIT-14,MumbaiPendency:5809Demand: Rs. 10134 Cr

CIT-40,MumbaiPendency:601Demand: Rs. 81634 Cr

Page 17: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Flow of Appeals in ZonesFlow Central

ChargesEast Zone

Mumbai Zone

North Zone

South Zone

West Zone

As on 1.4.2011 18634 28633 19271 39809 32532 47384

New Appeals 4547 5546 10233 13530 8030 17611

Workload 23812 34983 29757 52488 40644 64986

Disposal 6228 4359 9369 12062 6342 14785

Pendency 17584 30624 20388 40426 34302 50201

Page 18: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Disputed Demand and Pendency in Zones

CC38%

EZ3%

MZ29%

NZ11%

SZ11%

WZ8%

Disputed DemandCC9% EZ

16%

MZ11%NZ

21%SZ

18%

WZ

26%

Pendency

Page 19: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Flow of Appeals in RegionsRegions As on

1.4.2011New

Appeals Workload Disposal PendencyAhmadabad 15318 6110 21439 7642 13797Bangaluru 8179 2514 10665 1859 8806Bhopal 12602 4880 17467 2518 14949Bhubaneswar 2349 1148 3496 918 2578Chandigarh 13669 5662 19378 3824 15554Chennai 14195 2500 16630 2841 13789Delhi 16131 3466 19321 4920 14401Guwahati 1733 217 1950 149 1801Hyderabad 9846 2710 12547 2377 10170Jaipur 8750 4003 12756 2976 9780Kanpur 9928 2744 12623 2594 10029Kochi 5754 1112 6867 422 6445Kolkata 17598 3443 21891 3449 18442Lucknow 5021 2694 7730 1676 6054Mumbai 22290 11543 34277 11104 23173Nagpur 3272 573 3845 392 3453Patna 8083 1035 9095 352 8743Pune 11545 3143 14693 3132 11561

Page 20: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Ahm Ban Bho Bhu Cha Che Del Guw Hyd Jai Kan Koc Kol Luc Nag Pat Pun

4.7

12.1

6.4

1.4

4.1

6.9

23.8

1.1

8.1

1.6

4.83.7

5.0

1.7 2.5 1.9

5.0

Disputed Demand in Thousand Crore

Mumbai : 158.8

Page 21: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

159

1097

633350 290 427

719549

808

154526 452

238 282

3872

1225

374 452

Disputed Demand per CIT(A) in Rs. Crore

Page 22: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

Observations and Comments - 1• Total workload of 2.47 lakh appeals not uniformly distributed among the

CsIT(A) ranging from 6102 with CIT(A) Mumbai-14 to 139 with CIT(A) Siliguri

• Institution more than the Disposal => pendency accumulation => about 7000 appeals excess

• About 22% of workload constitutes the High Demand Appeals.• 30% of disposal constitutes High Demand Appeals• Disposal during the month increases from 12 appeals per CIT(A) in April

2011 to 30 appeals per CIT(A) in December 2011. • Progressive Disposal rate per CIT(A) per month increased from 12 per

CIT(A) in April 2011 to 24 per CIT(A) in December 2011.• 19% of pending appeals constitutes High Demand Appeals and lock-up

more than four-fifth (86%) of the total disputed demand at the end of December 2011.

Page 23: Analysis of Appeals Dec 2011 31.5.2012

• Only five CsIT(A) with disputed demand more than Rs. 10000 crore• Leaving them for customized treatment the average disputed demand falls

to Rs. 536 crore from Rs. 1045 crore per CIT(A)• 28% CsIT(A) have only less than Rs. 100 crore and about 85% have less

than Rs. 1000 crore as disputed demand• Only 35 CsIT(A) have more than Rs. 1000 crore.• Average disposal is 220 appeals per CIT(A) in the last nine months or

about 24 appeals per CIT(A) per month• Maximum disposal rate per CIT(A) about 3 appeals in two days• CIT(A)-14 and CIT(A)-40, Mumbai need specific strategies to tackle with

their pending appeals and the demand• Workload not in tune with the no. of CsIT(A) in some of the regions, and

hence needs rationalization

Observations and Comments - 2