Tax Appeal Board is a court

ANTHONY GAFOOR, chairman of the Tax Appeal Board, insisted yesterday that his Board is a court of superior record, and not a department of the Ministry of Finance. He said his post is supposed to be treated like that of a High Court judge with the mandatory age of retirement being 65. “It seems to be somewhat incongruous that the head of the court is supposed to be accorded the same allowances, terms and conditions of a High Court judge, but is left in the precarious and somewhat unfortunate position of the accounting officer seeking an interpretation of the terms and conditions of the office of chairman from a government department such as the Ministry of Finance, which is also the main respondent in cases brought before the court.”

Gafoor addressed members of the legal fraternity at the Hall of Justice in Port-of-Spain at the first sitting of the Board for the new law term. In attendance was president-designate of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) Michael de la Bastide SC. Gafoor said there have been unfortunate references in some quarters, even among court staff to the court being a ‘‘department,’’ suggesting perhaps a lesser status. Gafoor said attempts were made over the years to change “Board” to “Court.” “One of the serious disadvantages which has emerged over the years is to continue to associate this institution with the Board of Inland Revenue, which of course, is part of the Ministry of Finance and therefore properly regarded as a department.

“This has in turn led to certain reservations and misconceptions being expressed by many lay litigants who represent themselves that this organisation is merely a part of the Board of Inland Revenue against whose decision they are appealing. This not only causes much concern as to whether they may receive a fair and objective hearing, but also in terms of them and others understanding the role and status of the court,” the chairman added. Gafoor said although the Board has been in existence since 1967, it has not received the same dignity and respect as the High Court. He said because of the failure to recognise the Board as a court, it has resulted in the unfortunate and protracted delay of certain allowances to the chairman which he said is in stark contrast to similar treatment accorded to other judicial officers.

During his address, Gafoor spoke about ethics within the legal profession. He said the court had observed on numerous instances where attorneys do not always appear to respect the function of the court to hear and determine tax and other appeals prescribed by statute. “Regrettably, we have observed numerous instances over the course of the past year when attorneys are unwilling to accept that the court is entitled to enquire into the terms of a proposed agreement, often tendered at short notice, and to seek assistance from the respective parties when there appear to be discrepancies between the draft agreement and the pleadings of the parties.”