2021 (10) TMI 1210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short, "the Tribunal"] in O.A No.643/2021. 3.1. The record shows that, the petitioner had approached the Tribunal, to assail the charge-memo dated 30.07.2020 served upon him by the concerned authority, in exercise of powers under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 [in short "1965 Rules"]. 3.2. The record also shows that, the charge veered around the deduction allowed by the petitioner, amounting to Rs. 98,50,000/-, under Section 80-IB(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "the Act"] qua the assessee going by the name of Alliance Nirmaan Limited, concerning the assessment year (AY) 2009-2010. 3.3. It is the petitioner's claim that,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....passed neither on account of corrupt motive or recklessly. 3.7. In other words, according to the petitioner, since he had passed the assessment order in his role, as a quasi-judicial authority, he could not have been served with the chargesheet for performing such functions unless his action could be slotted into exceptions adverted hereinabove. 4. The Tribunal, unfortunately, has not discussed any of the aforementioned aspects in the impugned order. The rationale provided by the Tribunal is contained in paragraph 4 of the impugned order, which is extracted hereafter for the sake of convenience: "4. It is no doubt true that the allegation was in relation to an order passed by the applicant in the quasi judicial capacity. The ....