Page 56 - GSTL_27th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 4

J112 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 39
even more focused and determined. I am told there are even targets for issuing
prosecution notices and other penal provisions, which are monitored weekly by
New Delhi.
To sum up, under this Government, tax laws have become more draco-
nian, and the Government itself is setting stiff, unrealistic targets for tax officials,
who have got more powers to harass us. And so, the Department’s attitude, as a
whole, is more and more punitive and tax terrorism has increased. The charter is
the latest addition to the long list of deceitful slogans, coinages, memes, false
promises, and insincere announcements that Governments excel in.
[Source : Debashis Basu in Business Standard, New Delhi, dated 17-8-2020]

Contempt law needs rethink
The Supreme Court has, in the past, commented how it has broad
enough shoulders to tackle criticism directed at it. By holding lawyer Prashant
Bhushan guilty of contempt for his tweets, not only does it seem to have dimin-
ished its own earlier described virtue, but it may also be making a mountain out
of a molehill. Britain, from which India freed itself 73 years ago, for instance, offi-
cially abolished scandalising judges as a crime in 2013.
Taking part in the debate on the Bill that performed this, Robert Carswell
(a former Law Lord and Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland) said, ‘Judges
have to be hardy enough to shrug off criticism, even if it is intemperate or abu-
sive, which has happened; even if it is unfair and ill-informed, which has certain-
ly happened; and even if it is downright and deliberately misleading, the same
applies.’ Criticism serves, in a democracy, as a form of accountability. Distinction
has been drawn, by the Apex Court itself, in earlier rulings, between criticism of
judges and failure to comply with judicial orders and directions, to come down
heavily on the latter as real contempt, as it violates public justice.
Responding to every criticism - even strong criticism - directed at the
Court as jurisprudential blasphemy can be construed as a sign of over-reaction.
This can only diminish the gravitas the Supreme Court and the law should hold,
not enhance it. Critiques don’t automatically amount to contempt. The Court
should encourage a two-way passage with its critics - at least not actively set the
law as a guard dog to shut it.
[Source : The Economic Times, New Delhi, dated 17-8-2020]

Physical hearings in SC may resume soon
Physical hearing of cases is likely to resume in a limited manner in the
Supreme Court (SC) on a trial basis soon, a Seven-Judge Committee constituted
on July 22 to decide on the reopening of physical Courts decided on August 11.
Additional Registrar Mahesh T. Patankar informed the leaders of the
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and Supreme Court Advocates-on-
Record Association (SCAORA), on August 18, about the decision of the Commit-
tee to commence physical hearing of a limited number of cases after 10 days.
“It has been suggested that a limited number of cases be listed for physi-
cal hearing on experimental basis after 10 days,” Patankar said in his letter about
GST LAW TIMES  27th August 2020  56
( A112 )