2019 (6) TMI 449 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Court rules in favor of Department, no violation found. Reward on hold pending tax appeals. Contempt Petition closed.

Darshan Singh Parmar Versus The Union of India & Others

The Court ruled in favor of the Departmental authority, finding no violation of previous orders in the ongoing proceedings. The reward amount was not ... Non-payment of Reward payable - matter in dispute and is pending - HELD THAT:- All matters concerning the reward claimed by the Petitioner, are pending at the first or second appellate stage or in reference before the High Court. According to the Respondents, therefore, at this stage, reward amount cannot be released, since tax has not became irrevocably due to the Government. There are no reason to doubt the statement made by the Officer of the Government on affidavit - there are no disobedience of any of the orders passed by the High Court in the present proceedings. Contempt Petition is, therefore, required to be closed. Petition disposed off. Issues:- Non-payment of reward amount under a scheme by the Departmental authority to the Petitioner.- Dispute regarding the release of reward amount due to pending tax appeals and references.Analysis:1. The Petitioner filed a Writ Petition stating that the Departmental authority failed to pay the reward amount as per a scheme where informants are entitled to a reward if tax recovery is made based on their information. The Court had issued interim orders, and the Department calculated the reward amount due to the Petitioner, quantified at Rs. 29,89,606. However, the Respondents argued that the reward amount cannot be released yet as tax disputes are pending, and recovery is not final.2. The Respondents highlighted that due to pending first or second appeals and references, the recovery is not irrevocably made, as stated in an affidavit. They claimed that until all tax disputes are resolved in favor of the Government, the reward amount cannot be released. The Court acknowledged the Respondents' position and found no disobedience of previous orders.3. The Court accepted the statement made by the Government officer in the affidavit regarding the pending tax appeals and references. Consequently, the Court ruled that there was no violation of any previous orders by the High Court in the ongoing proceedings, leading to the closure of the Contempt Petition.4. Before concluding the matter, the Court directed the Respondents to provide details of all tax appeals and references pending before different authorities or courts by a specified date. The Petitioner was allowed to seek further information related to these pending matters if needed. Additionally, the Petitioner was instructed to inform the Government Authority if any proceedings reached finality, and if the reward was not paid, the Petitioner could apply in the ongoing Petition.5. The Contempt Petition was disposed of accordingly, with the Court ensuring transparency and providing avenues for the Petitioner to address any concerns regarding the release of the reward amount based on the resolution of pending tax disputes.