<p class="intro" style="text-align: justify;">The Ministry of Finance (<strong>MoF</strong>) has issued a ‘removal of difficulties’ order with respect to the changes introduced in the Finance Act, 2017 (<strong>Act</strong>) regarding qualifications of members of Tribunals.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Section 184 of the Act, which deals with qualifications of the members of tribunals came into effect on May 26, 2017.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Second proviso to Section 184 of the Act caps the maximum age of a ‘Presiding Officer’ of a tribunal/appellate tribunal at sixty-seven whereas for Chairperson/Chairman/President it has been capped at seventy years.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">However, under the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 the term of an existing ‘Presiding Officer’ of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (<strong>SAT</strong>) may extend to the age of sixty-eight years.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Therefore, on May 29, 2017, Section 184 has been amended to increase the age limit of the presiding officer to <strong>seventy years</strong> to harmonise with the existing law.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The reason being, a Supreme Court Judge may retire only by the age of sixty-five and to allow such a judge to get a full tenure of five years as a Presiding Officer, the age limit cannot be at sixty-seven. By the way of this amendment, the post of the Presiding Officer of the SAT has been brought at par with Chairperson/Chairman/President of other tribunals/appellate tribunals.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The MoF has, however, in a badly worded order, not reflected this reason well enough. The notification reads,</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">“<em>And whereas, a difficulty has arisen in giving effect to the aforesaid provisions of the said Act as a Judge of the Supreme Court or the Chief Justice of a High Court or a Judge of a High Court, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">after appointment as the Presiding Officer</span> of Securities Appellate Tribunal may not be retired at the age of Sixty-five and his age of retirement be increase to the Seventy years as in case of the Chairperson or Chairman or President of Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal, or as the case may be, Authority;…</em>“</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Additionally Part XIV of Chapter VI of the Act was also notified on May, 26, the part which deals with the <span style="color: #993366;"><a href="https://barandbench.com/finance-act-2017-tribunals/" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="color: #993366;" target="_blank">much-debated merging of tribunals</a></span>. Schedule nine of the Act enlists the tribunals which are being merged.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Read the order</p>
<p class="intro" style="text-align: justify;">The Ministry of Finance (<strong>MoF</strong>) has issued a ‘removal of difficulties’ order with respect to the changes introduced in the Finance Act, 2017 (<strong>Act</strong>) regarding qualifications of members of Tribunals.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Section 184 of the Act, which deals with qualifications of the members of tribunals came into effect on May 26, 2017.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Second proviso to Section 184 of the Act caps the maximum age of a ‘Presiding Officer’ of a tribunal/appellate tribunal at sixty-seven whereas for Chairperson/Chairman/President it has been capped at seventy years.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">However, under the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 the term of an existing ‘Presiding Officer’ of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (<strong>SAT</strong>) may extend to the age of sixty-eight years.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Therefore, on May 29, 2017, Section 184 has been amended to increase the age limit of the presiding officer to <strong>seventy years</strong> to harmonise with the existing law.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The reason being, a Supreme Court Judge may retire only by the age of sixty-five and to allow such a judge to get a full tenure of five years as a Presiding Officer, the age limit cannot be at sixty-seven. By the way of this amendment, the post of the Presiding Officer of the SAT has been brought at par with Chairperson/Chairman/President of other tribunals/appellate tribunals.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">The MoF has, however, in a badly worded order, not reflected this reason well enough. The notification reads,</p>.<p style="text-align: justify; padding-left: 30px;">“<em>And whereas, a difficulty has arisen in giving effect to the aforesaid provisions of the said Act as a Judge of the Supreme Court or the Chief Justice of a High Court or a Judge of a High Court, <span style="text-decoration: underline;">after appointment as the Presiding Officer</span> of Securities Appellate Tribunal may not be retired at the age of Sixty-five and his age of retirement be increase to the Seventy years as in case of the Chairperson or Chairman or President of Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal, or as the case may be, Authority;…</em>“</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Additionally Part XIV of Chapter VI of the Act was also notified on May, 26, the part which deals with the <span style="color: #993366;"><a href="https://barandbench.com/finance-act-2017-tribunals/" rel="noopener noreferrer" style="color: #993366;" target="_blank">much-debated merging of tribunals</a></span>. Schedule nine of the Act enlists the tribunals which are being merged.</p>.<p style="text-align: justify;">Read the order</p>