2016 (4) TMI 240

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he service tax dues of 2.59 crores. Based on the circulars styled as "reward circulars", details of which are set out in para 3 of the writ petition, the petitioner claims that he is entitled to reward in the sum of Rs. 51,80,000/-. 3) Reliance is placed upon a Division Bench judgment of this court rendered in the case of XYZ vs. Union of India Writ Petition No. 1882 of 2014, which has been decided by this court on 27th April, 2015. 4) From para 4 of the petition, a reference is made to the reward circulars and then it is stated that one M/s. Asian News International (ANI) was the tax defaulter. Upon the petitioner providing information, this defaulter came forward and voluntarily paid the service tax. Thus, the efforts of the petitioner ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....laced on Exhibit - 1 to the affidavit in reply. 8) The petitioner filed a detailed rejoinder, in which he asserts that it is not his business to give specific figures or details of the evasion. He has to only complain and thereafter give information with regard to the evasion of service tax. If that information, as provided, is true and correct and based on that recoveries are effected, then, the reward circular mandates computation of the sum based on the quantum thereof and not how the authorities arrive at any figures and attributable to the information. Thus, the case of the petitioner is that it is not possible for the authorities to bifurcate the information and attribute to the petitioner only that part of it, which results in actua....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... had very little role in the recovery, which alone was enough to qualify and consider the petitioner eligible for full reward at the rate of 20%. Thus, how the reward amount is to be computed and whether the amount as computed by the respondents is in tune with the reward scheme or the circular in that behalf itself is a disputed question. Once the petitioner now and in the rejoinder affidavit seeks more details of the information already forwarded and tries to elaborate it with figures, particularly after enlisting the services provided by the assessee, then, all the more we do not think that in writ jurisdiction we can resolve such a factual dispute. We cannot undertake an elaborate exercise of arriving at the figures of the reward. It is....