High Court Of Delhi
A.K. Diwan vs. Union Of India
Sections 132
A.K. Sikri, J.
Civil Writ Petn. No. 8346 of 2002
28th March, 2003
Counsel Appeared : Sanjeev Bahl, for the Petitioner : Sanjeev Khanna, for the Respondent
JUDGMENT
A.K. Sikri, J. :
The petitioner has filed this writ petition claiming the reward for information supplied by him to the IT authorities about the huge tax evasion in crores of rupees by the two group of firms in pursuance whereof IT Department could recover substantial tax recovery from the said parties. It is stated in the petition that IT authorities have made payment of Rs. 50,000 each for the said two groups to the petitioner some time in the year 1995 and thereafter further amount of Rs. 1,00,000 was paid to the petitioner with regard to one such party. The petitioner claims 10 per cent of the recoveries pursuant to the scheme of the IT authorities in this behalf and, therefore, directions are sought to the effect that the respondents be directed to pay this amount to the petitioner. The respondents have explained that the assessment of reward itself takes place at three separate stages, namely (a) interim, (b) part final, and (c) final. For the purpose of part final and final payment, the AOs are required to fill up a performa consisting of various details relating to income returned, assessed, amount surrendered and extra taxes realized, etc. The concerned Investigation Wing Unit thereafter fills up another part of the performa which quantifies income eligible for reward on the basis of information provided by the informants. The above information is thereafter sent to audit. The audit examines and certifies the receipt of payment of taxes in the performa concerned and thereafter the reward proposal is put up before the concerned authority. The respondents have now filed counter-affidavit dt. 24th Feb., 2002, in which it is stated that efforts are being made to pay the final reward to the petitioner as per guidelines with approval of the Committee/CBDT. During arguments, learned counsel for the respondents stated that it may take about 4/5 months to complete the process and pay the final reward to the petitioner. Since much time has elapsed as information was given by the petitioner in the year 1994 pursuant to which searches were made on 4th Oct., 1994 and 4th March 1995, the respondents should finalise the case of reward payable to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case within 5 months from today, the time which as per the respondents is required to complete the process. It may be mentioned here that during arguments learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he was not pressing the relief of ex gratia payment. Needless to mention, if the petitioner is not satisfied with the final payment made to him, he shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps in this behalf as admissible under the law. With these observations, this writ petition stands disposed of.
[Citation : 265 ITR 248]
