Since 1940s, which marks the beginning of modern taxation system in the country, Ethiopia has passed through different legal regimes of tax appeal. Among them, the 2002 and the 2016 reforms are the last two changes that have been under taken in the country. This research principally examines the improvements, changes and possible shortfalls of the newly introduced Tax Administration Proclamation (Pro. 983/2016) vise- a – vise the 2002 appeal system that lasted for more than fourteen years. One of the prerequisites of an efficient tax administration is the prevalence of competent dispute settlement mechanisms to which the tax authority and the taxpayers may resort in instances of disagreement and grievances. Establishing such well-organized dispute handling system in turn presupposes the integration of procedural justice, protection of taxpayers’ rights and balancing the competing interests of the tax authority and the taxpayers. The research aims at providing an in- depth analysis on the effectiveness or otherwise of the existing appeal system. It also identifies the structure, features and characteristics of the current appeal system. Apart from the 2002 tax appeal system which serves as a spot of comparison, the research has intensely presented the experiences of several tax jurisdictions. In spite of a number of improvements that have been added following the enactment of the TAP, the writer has found out that the Ethiopian tax appeal system still suffers from a lot of acute problems whether it is seen independently or in comparison with other jurisdictions. This is especially true for the first two forums of tax appeal- the internal review and administrative appeal phases where lack of impartiality and independence is more rampant. Some reforms such as the change on the review power of the internal review level and the composition and selection of members of the Tax Appeal Commission are even worse than the pre-2016 system. The shortcomings are all inclusive in a sense they touch almost everything such as rules, procedures, power of decision-makers, organization, structure and review power of decision-making bodies. The research recommends comprehensive remedies that take in to account each major potential shortcoming of the three appeal phases. Though much of the undone task in this regard pertains to the domain of the legislature and the administrative wing of the government, the judiciary, academicians, bar associations, the business community etc may play affirmative roles by persuading the legislature and the administrative branches for adjustment and improvements of the prevailing shortfalls of the tax appeal system.