|Sr. No.||W. P. No.||Reported||Issue||Remark|
|1.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners jointly with the Chamber of Income Tax Consultants and Others Vs. Union of India.||1052 of 1994||(1994) 209 ITR 660 (Bom)||Circular No. 681 946-TDS on payment of professional fees to for professional services.||Govt. amended the Law.|
|2.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India.||2464 of 1996||Income Tax Review Page 4 Vol. XXIII April 1997||Residential Accomo- dation to Members of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay.||Govt. provided accommodation to members of ITAT, Mumbai.|
|3.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India.||973 of 1997||(1997) 228 ITR 68 (Bom)||Constitutional Validity of VDIS Scheme, 1997.||Constitutional Validity was upheld.|
|4.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India.||1998||(1998) 231 ITR 24 (SC)||Constitutional Validity of VDIS Scheme, 1997.||Constitutional Validity was upheld. Govt. filed undertaking before Supreme Court.|
|5.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners jointly with Rajasthan Tax Consultants Vs. Union of India||4241 of 1997
|(1998) 97 Taxmann 48 (Raj.)
|Residential Accommodation to members of ITAT.
|High Court directed Govt. to provide accommodation to members of ITAT.|
|Union of India Vs. All Gujarat Federation of Tax Practitioners||SLP Nos. 6904.6905 of 1998||AIFTP Journal April’ 2004 Page 34||Residential Accommodation to members of ITAT.||Apex Court directed the Government to provide Residential accommodation, telephone, Newspaper, library, car, secretarial assistance, etc.|
|6.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India||4086 of 1998||(1999) 236 ITR 1. (Delhi)||Constitutional validity of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998.||Applicable even in respect of Departmental appeals. Govt. accepted the Judgement of Delhi High Court (1998) 234 ITR 62 (St.)|
|7.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India||SLP 556 of 98||Constitutional Validity of levy of Tribunal fees and appeal fees before CIT(A). Petition filed before Supreme Court under Article 32 of constitution of India. R||Petition withdrawn due to technical reason Govt. has amended the law. Now as regards levy of appeal fees before High Court.|
|8.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners jointly with Bombay Chartered Accountants & Others.||142 of 1999||AIFTP Bulletin Vol 14 Part B Oct. Nov. 98 Page 49||Constitutional validity of levy of service Tax on Chartered Accountants||The Bombay High Court upheld the constitutional validity of levy of Service Tax. The SLP filed by the Federation is admitted and pending for final hearing before the Supreme Court.|
|(2002) 256 ITR 401(Bom)
(2002) 254 (SC) ITR St. 254
CC No. 6901 of 2001(SLP)
|9.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners jointly with Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association & Others||624 of 1999 (Bom)
|(2001) 116 Taxmann 418 (Bom)||Office Accommodation to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bombay for five additional Benches||Bombay High Court passed the order allotting the space for functioning of five additional benches of ITAT. Because of order of Bombay High Court all 10 benches of ITAT Mumbai is functioning from same premises.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered to maintain status co of the matter. The matters is pending before the Bombay High Court.
|SLP No. 15549 of 2002 dt. 18-2-2002|
|10.||All India Federation of Tax Practitioners jointly with Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association||2166 of 2002||Discrimination while allotting the accommodation to Member of ITAT, who join from the profession.
Government accepted the representation and at present all the Members of ITAT are getting the residential accommodation.
|Court directed to make Representation to Government. As Government rejected the representation the petition became in fructuous. (Order dt. 27-11-2002)|
|11.||Union of India Vs. Shri R. P. Tolani, Judicial Member (AIFTP Joined as Intrevener to bring correct facts before the court)||808 of 2000||Contempt proceedings against the Estate manager for not following the order of the High Court for providing accommodation to members of ITAT||Pending for Final hearing.|
|12.||All India Federation of Practitioners vs. Union of India||W.P. No. 11718 of 2003||(2003) 264 ITR 466(Orissa)
|National Tax Tribunal Ordinance||Stayed the operation of the National Tax Tribunal Ordinance.|
|UOI moved an application to transfer all the petitions pending before various High Courts to Hon’ble Supreme Court. As the ordinance lapsed the petitions became infractuous.|
|13.||P.C. Joshi C/o. AIFTP vs. Union of India.
|W.P. No. 2792 of 03||Constituted Validity of NTT Admitted.
|Ordinance Lapsed – New Bill Introduced.|
PETITIONS FILED BY ASSOCIATION MEMBERS OF FEDERATION
|14.||The Chamber of Income Tax Consultants Vs. Union of India||2762 of 1992||First PIL Petition filed by the Association challenging the constitutional validity of Income Tribunal fees from 250 to 1500||Law is amended.|
|15.||Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association Vs. Union of India||2350 of 1996
|Income Tax Review April 1997 page 1 to 3 Vol. XXIII No. 1.
|Letter of Law Secretary to intervene in the judicial function of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is challenged. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court stayed the order of law secretary.||In the said matter the Law Secretary is held of liable for contempt proceedings. Tribunal held to be Court.
|(1999) 235 ITR 175(SC) ITAT Vs. V. K. Agrawal|
|Transfer Petition No. 5 & 6 of 1997||Ajay Gandhi vs. B. Singh (2004) 265 ITR 451 (SC)
AIFTP Journal Vol. 6 No. 1, Jan’ 04
|Guidelines prescribed for transfer of Members.
|16.||All Gujarat Federation of Tax Practitioners Vs. Union of India||Levy of appeal fees before CIT (A) and ITAT.||Admitted and pending for final hearing before the Gujarat High Court.|
|17.||The Bombay Chartered Accountant Society Vs. Union of India||(2002) 34 BCAJ 348||Shops and establishment Act applicable to Chartered Accountants||Admitted and stay granted. Pending for final disposal.|
|18.||All Kerala Chartered Accountants Association Vs. Union of India||(2002) 176 CTR (Ker.) 268||Levy of Service Tax on Chartered Accountants||Held constitutionally valid.|
|19.||Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Association Society Vs. Union of India||(2002) 176 CTR (Raj.) 177||Levy of Service Tax on Chartered Accountants||Held constitutionally valid.|
|20.||Chartered Accountants Association Vs. Union of India||(2001) 168 CTR 4 / 252 ITR 53 / 115 Taxman 543 (Guj.)||Levy of Service Tax on Chartered Accountants||Held constitutionally valid.|
|21.||P. C. Joshi vs. Union of India||W.P. No. 1927 of 2011||Levy of Service Tax on the Representation Advise and Arbitration by Advocates.||
Pending for admission before Bombay High Court.