AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 523
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uch information, the officers of DGCEI carried out raid at the factory premises of M/s. VFL and their raid reveal that indeed it was a case of excise duty evasion on big scale. 2.2 On completion of the investigation, show cause notice was issued by the excise authorities, whereby demand of Rs. 9,92,31,857/- was raised and upon adjudication, was confirmed by the adjudicating authority. The confirmation of duty was challenged by VFL before the CESTAT. However, such appeal came to be dismissed and hence, demand of duty adjudicated has attained finality. 2.3 The petitioner-informer has received an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as advance reward for the information. 2.4 The case of the petitioner for receiving the final reward on the basis of the adjudication by the adjudicating authority was considered by the Rewards Committee. The decision of the Rewards Committee was communicated under communication dated 19.12.2011. From this communication, it appears that the Rewards Committee has held as under:- "The committee perused the O-41 register of the unit maintained by the range for the period 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-01. The Committee noted that after debiting Rs. 92,00,000/- from RG ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....damus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to : a. Withdraw and/or cancel the impugned decision dated 28-11-2011 by Rewards committee b. To forthwith grant the balance interim reward on the net recovery being Rs. 2212023.00 (2312023.00 less 100000.00 Advance reward amount paid) @ 20% of the debited portion of total demand being 11560118.00 along with interest for the such delayed payment of reward c. To attain finality to the issue of reward be further pleased direct and/or request DRT, Mumbai to expedite the disposal of the pending proceeding No.484 of 2002 against M/s VFL" 3. In support of his contention, learned Advocate Shri Chhabaria for the petitioner submitted that the decision of the Rewards Committee is not in consonance with the scheme. He submitted that once the adjudication is concluded, the petitioner was entitled to receive the reward under the scheme. He submitted that though the scheme envisages payment of reward on the basis of recovery made, in view of the communication, he would submit that the adjudicating authority in an order, which has attained finality, has concluded that the amount of excise duty is received. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be eligible for reward upto 20% of the net saleproceeds of the contraband goods seized and/or amount of duty evaded plus amount of fine and penalty levied /imposed and recovered. However, in respect of gold, silver, opium and other narcotic drugs etc. seized under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 /Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, the overall ceiling of reward will be as per specific rates indicated in the Annexure. These ceilings would be subject to periodical revision in the light of the price fluctuations of these items, for which periodical intimations may be sent to the DGRI /DGNCB, who, in turn, will send suitable recommendations to the Ministry, for appropriate revision, as and when warranted. 5.1 Reward is purely an ex-gratia payment which, subject to guidelines, may be granted on the absolute discretion of the authority competent to grant rewards and cannot be claimed by anyone as a matter of right. In determining the reward which may be granted, the authority competent to grant reward will keep in mind the specificity and accuracy of the information, the risk and trouble undertaken, the extent and nature of the help rendered by the inf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... constituted reward sanctioning authority/committee shall not be reviewed or reopened. However, in most exceptional cases, where DGRI, DGCEI, or the Chief Commissioner, as the case may be, is satisfied that the review of the final reward sanctioned by the competent authority is absolutely necessary to redress any grave injustice meted out to the Informer /Govt. servant and make a recommendation to the Board to this effect, the Govt. may review the final reward sanctioned on the specific recommendations of the Board." 13. UNDERTAKING BY THE INFORMER At the time when an informer furnishes any information or documents, an undertaking should be taken from the informer that he/she is aware that the extent of the reward depends on the precision of the information furnished by him/her; that the provisions of Section 82 of the Indian Penal Code have been read by and/or explained to him/her; that he/she is aware that if the information furnished by him/her is found to be false, he/she would be liable to prosecution; that he/she accepts that the Govt. is under no obligation to enter into any correspondence regarding the details of seizures made, etc., if any, and that the payment of rew....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and whether apart from seizure of contraband goods, the owners/organisers/ financiers/racketeers have been apprehended. The scheme further mentions that reward is an ex-gratia payment and subject to the guidelines and may be granted on the absolute discretion of the authority competent and further that no one can claim the reward as a matter of right. The High Court in writ jurisdiction cannot examine or weigh the various factors which have to be taken into consideration while deciding a claim regarding grant of reward. These are matters exclusively within the domain of the authorities of the Department as they alone can weigh and examine the usefulness or otherwise of the information given by the informer. In the writ petition filed by the respondent, no details had been given on the relevant issues. If the grant of reward cannot be claimed as a matter of right it is not understandable as to how a Writ of Mandamus can be issued commanding the Government to give a particular amount by way of reward. Though this specific plea was taken in paras 18 and 21 of the counter affidavit, yet neither the learned Single Judge nor the Division Bench adverted to this aspect of the matter. 13.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lved in the present petition is squarely covered in the decision of the Apex Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA v. C. KRISHNA REDDY reported in 2004 (163) ELT 4 (SC). In paragraphs 13 and 14 of the judgment, the Apex Court held as under: "13. It is well settled by a catena of decisions of this Court that a Writ of Mandamus can be granted only in case where there is a statutory duty imposed upon the officer concerned and there is failure on the part of the officer to discharge the statutory obligation. The chief function of the writ is to compel performance of public duties prescribed by statute and to keep subordinate tribunals and officers exercising public functions within the limit of their jurisdiction. Therefore, in order that a mandamus may issue to compel the authorities to do something, it must be shown that there is a statute which imposed a legal duty and the aggrieved party has a legal right under the statute to enforce its performance. (See Bihar Eastern Gangetic Fisherman Co-Operative Society Ltd. v. Sipahi Singh - AIR 977 SC 2149 para 15, Lekhraj Satram Dass Lalvani v. Deputy Custodian-cum-Managing Officer, AIR 1966 SC 334 and Dr. Umakant Saran v. State of Bihar - ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons for impugned award to the informant, we are of the considered view that as the Rewards Committee has not adverted to various factors which are required to be taken into consideration by the Rewards Committee for coming to the conclusion qua the informant's entitlement to receive reward and the quantum, the Rewards Committee has rather rendered its decision making it subject to outcome of the proceedings before the DRT. The non-advertance to various factors in non-recording of findings qua informant or as to why informant deserves what reward and not recording its clear findings, the order is rendered vulnerable and hence, the Rewards Committee will have to take afresh look into the matter. We hastened to add here that therefore, without recording our view on the rival submissions, we deem it fit to direct the Rewards Committee for arriving its own conclusion after affording proper opportunity to the concerned. It shall record its reasons, keeping in mind the ingredients to be considered for examining the entitlement of the informant and quantum to be awarded. We once again clarify that we are not opining on merits of the contention qua entitlement or otherwise of the inform....