A ALAGUPONNU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner seeks for a relief to set aside the order dated 06.06.2003 and for a consequential direction to pay a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- Lakhs in view of the information granted by him which allegedly led to the seizure of Rs. 60,00,000/- and 10 Kgs of gold from a gold merchant, Theni, on 13.10.2005.

(2.) By the impugned notice, the petitioner informed that since the matter related to seizure of cash and gold jewellery was pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT and only after the conclusion of the proceedings, further steps shall be taken.

(3.) The writ petition was admitted on 15.07.2005. Pursuant to the notice, the second respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 24.10.2005. It is seen from the counter affidavit that the jewelleries seized from the gold merchant was valued at Rs. 45,12,514/- and the value of the silver was Rs. 6,60,000/- and not as contended by the petitioner. It was also stated that the payment of any reward amount is governed by the guidelines issued by Central Board of Direct Tax (CBDT) known as "Grant of award to an Informant 1995", dated 30.11.1990. As per the said guidelines, grant of reward amount is not based on a matter of right and the informant is bound by the decision of the competent authority. The amount also will be paid on the undertaking that he had agreed to receive the award with no right to question the decision of the competent authority. It is also stated that the reward can be pertained the extra taxes levied or realised which are directly attributable to the information supplied.