https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101111 Reward under the informant guidelines was treated as ex gratia and subject to the competent authority's discretion, with relaxation beyond the prescribed ceiling resting with the Full Board. The informant had accepted that the payment was non-contractual and would not be challenged in court. After re-examining the tax recovery, supplied information and weightage methodology, the Board recalculated the reward and found the earlier recommendation incorrect. The Court declined to substitute its own assessment, holding that writ interference was unavailable absent manifest illegality or patent arbitrariness. The enhanced claim was rejected and the writ petition dismissed. en-us Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:27:37 +0530 Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:27:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101111 Reward under the informant guidelines was treated as ex gratia and subject to the competent authority's discretion, with relaxation beyond the prescribed ceiling resting with the Full Board. The informant had accepted that the payment was non-contractual and would not be challenged in court. After re-examining the tax recovery, supplied information and weightage methodology, the Board recalculated the reward and found the earlier recommendation incorrect. The Court declined to substitute its own assessment, holding that writ interference was unavailable absent manifest illegality or patent arbitrariness. The enhanced claim was rejected and the writ petition dismissed. Highlights Income Tax Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:27:37 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101111