N.A. Khan vs Union Of India & Ors.

By Mallika Arya, AM

Through this Original application, the applicant is seeking direction to the respondents to grant him reward in 43 cases under “Reward Scheme” circulated by government for quality assessment work.

Briefly stating, the facts of the case are that the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, CBDT by their D.O. F.No. 414/10/83-IT (Inv) dated 06.11.1985 (Annexure A/1) introduced ‘Reward Scheme’ for giving incentives for uncovering tax evasion, detecting tax avoidance as well as improving quality of assessment work. While working as Income Tax Officer, the applicant had passed Income Tax Assessment orders in 43 cases. These orders qualify the conditions laid down under the Reward Scheme of 1985. He has claimed reward in all these cases but the same were kept pending. Thereafter, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur vide letter dated 10.06.2016 (Annexure A/4) addressed to the Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax Bhopal forwarded his comments on each and every case. A copy of the same has been endorsed to the applicant also (Annexure A/4). The said letter contains detailed remarks against each case where the applicant claimed had reward. Further, vide letter dated 16.12.2014 (Annexure A/5), the CCIT Raipur, informed the applicant that a letter had been sent to the CIT Bilaspur on 16.12.2014 to examine the cases with reference to the explanation filed by applicant in respect of the rejection of his claim. Thereafter, the applicant again gave representations on 27.12.2014 (Annexure A/6) and on 19.10.2016 (Annexure A/7). However, the respondents have not decided his claims till date.

The respondents have filed their reply wherein it has been submitted that the applicant had furnished the details of 43 cases in which he had claimed his entitlement for reward. In this connection, a desired report was submitted vide office letter F.No. CIT/Bsp/Tech/Reward /NAK/2015-16/1141 dated 26.11.2015 (Annexure-A) and F.No. CIT /Bsp/Tech/Reward/NAK/2016-17/725 dated 30/06/2016 (Annexure-A). Comments in respect of all the 43 cases are annexed as Annexure-A. Applicant's claim under the reward scheme in all these cases has been examined. Since the conditions specified in the Reward Scheme have not been fulfilled by the applicant in most of the cases, he is not entitled for reward.

We have considered the matter, heard the counsels and perused the pleadings and documents annexed with the Original Application.

The contention of the applicant is that he had passed income tax assessment orders as income tax officer in 43 cases and all these orders qualify the conditions laid down under the Reward Scheme of Govt. of India dated 09.11.1985 (Annexure A/1). His case has not been considered by the respondents and even the representations filed by him have not been decided till date.

On perusal of letter dated 10.06.2014 (Annexure A/4), it is observed that in all the cases except 11 cases, he was not found eligible for reward under the scheme. In the balance 11 cases, the requisite reports were not complete. Since in nine cases, the record was not available, CIT, Bilaspur was directed to furnish the report in respect of the other two cases. The same has also been communicated to the applicant vide letter dated 16.12.2014 by the Office of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur (Respondent no. 4).

A letter dated 30.06.2016 (Annexure A) was written by Principal Commissioner Income Tax, Bilaspur to CCIT Raipur (Respondent no. 4) wherein it has been categorically stated in respect of 9 cases the claim of the reward merits to be rejected. He has vide letter dated 26.11.2015 (Annexure A), given a detailed review note in respect of 33 cases (Annexure A) wherein the claim of reward has been found to be untenable. We take note of the fact that the case of the applicant has been duly considered by the respondents. Further, the two rejection orders dated 10.06.2014 (Annexure A/4) and 16.12.2014 (Annexure A/5) have been communicated to him. The case of the applicant has been duly considered by the respondents on merits and rejected as it did not fall within the prescribed conditions of the reward scheme (Annexure A/1).

Despite the rejection order dated 16.12.2014 (Annexure A/5), the applicant again raised the issue with the PCCIT, Bhopal (Respondent no. 3) vide his letter dated 19.10.2016 (Annexure A/7). The applicant in the O.A. has mentioned that his representation dated 19.10.2016 (Annexure A/7) is pending with the respondents. The fact remains that the respondents have already examined the case of the applicant at length and rejected his claim for reward in 2014 itself.

This Original Application has been filed in January 2017 despite the rejection order dated 16.12.2014. Merely filing representations time and again does not revive a stale cause of action. The Supreme Court in State of Tripura Vs. Arabinda Chakraborty 2014 (6) SCC 460 has held that repeated non- statutory representations cannot be allowed to revive or postpone limitation ad infinitum.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. M.K. Sarkar reported in 2010 (2) SCC 59 has held as under:-

Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the Original Application. Hence Original Application is dismissed on grounds of limitation as well as on merits. No costs.