TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (9) TMI 105
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y amounting to Rs. 3 crores approximately by contravening the conditions of Adhoc Exemption Order No. 103/87, dated 30-3-1987 as amended. It is also alleged that M/s. Sanjeevani had got the exemption order from the Government of India exempting Fodder Production Units to be imported by them subject to the conditions that they would donate to Bharath Krishk Samaj within 15 days from the date of clearance, and would use them only for demonstration purposes but, conditions have been violated. It is alleged that M/s. Sanjeevani had imported and cleared through the Port of Madras these machines free of duty in terms of the said exemption order. It is further stated in the affidavit that M/s. Sanjeevani had produced some documents showing donations, and that instead of 50 machines, 56 machines had been actually imported and 5 out of the 6 excess machines had been sold by them to some Government Department. It is also submitted that on information and on investigation, the Department was of the view that certain items were liable for confiscation and accordingly confiscated them under the proviso to Section 110(1) of the Customs Act, the details of which were given in the affidavit. It is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ment thwarted the plans of the companies, mentioned in the affidavit. It is alleged that the payment of reward is not something gratis, that there was no question of any ex gratia payment and that there is a legal obligation on the part of the Government to pay reward, when the petitioner had informed certain details, even taking the risk of his life and as such is entitled to the payment of reward, as per the scheme in F. No R. 13011/5/88 - Adv. dated 7-6-1988. It is also stated that on account of a conflict between the Customs department and the DRI, petitioner cannot be deprived of the reward and the same cannot be given to the persons of DRI department and as such there is a bias and mala fides on the part of the authorities concerned and they forced the petitioner to run from pillar to post which act amounts to mala fide. It is also submitted that as there is no remedy and the petitioner has been paid Rs. 10 lakhs against Rs. 1,71,43,273/- which is praying to grant Rs. 75,71,636/- being the balance advance reward pending final disposal of the writ petition. In the main writ petition, the petitioner sought for a direction to the respondents praying to grant the full reward of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n hearing the parties, by a detailed order, held that the petitioner has given the information about the contravention made by the companies, as stated above, and the units were seized, adjudication proceedings were initiated and finally a duty to the tune of Rs. 3.37 crores was levied apart from redemption fine of Rs. 3.80 crores and penalty of Rs. 1.55 crores. It was also observed that the respondents/Department have not expressed any difficulty in locating the units for confiscation, that the information so furnished was correct and accurate and as such, there cannot be any doubt that the petitioner is entitled to reward of 20%. The argument of the department that the orders are merely guidelines and have no mandatory force and it is only the absolute discretion of the authority had been repelled. The learned single Judge further observed that in case the petitioner had not passed on the information, the Department could not have been able to find out the evasion and therefore on the principle of legitimate expectation, the petitioner is entitled to get 20% from out of the duty sought to be evaded, levy of penalty and fine. 6.Learned single Judge also considered certain decisi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is writ appeal is whether the petitioner is entitled to get the reward and to what extent. 11. The relevant portions of the guidelines in F. N. 13011/3/85-Adv., dated 30-3-1985 are extracted as under : Informers and Government servants will be eligible for3.2.1. reward up to 20% of the duty, if any, sought to be evaded plus 20% of the fine and penalty levied/imposed and realised, provided the amount does not exceed 20% of the market value of the goods involved. 5.1Payment of advance rewards Advance reward may be paid to informers and Government servants up to 50% of the expected final reward immediately on seizure in respect of the following categories of goods, namely :- ............. In all other cases, whether the seizure or of5.3 evasion/infringement detected on the basis of documents, 25% of the expected final reward may be paid after the issue of a show cause notice provided the authority competent to sanction reward is satisfied that there is reasonable chance of confiscability/infringement/evasion, as the case may be, being established in adjudication and sustained in appeal/revisionary proceedings. In all other cases, 25% of the expected final reward may be6.3 paid ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....delines is not tenable. The learned single Judge has also repelled the argument. We find no reason to differ from. At the most, the letter dated 15-5-1989 modifying the earlier policy dated 30-3-1985 i.e. para 6.3 to the extent of 25% of the expected final reward, should be paid only after actual realisation of excise duty/customs/penalty/fine, etc. So, we find no reason to differ with the views of the learned single Judge on this aspect. 15.So far as the right to get reward amount is concerned, one cannot claim a right of reward as one has a duty to discharge in the administration of justice. But, so long as the guidelines are in existence, as stated, and are not scrapped, the Department cannot deprive the informers from getting the reward amount. It is also not disputed that, on earlier occasion, persons who are informers are getting the reward on furnishing information. Now, what is to be seen as to whether the information is specific, correct and accurate. Therefore, in view of the facts of the given case, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to get the reward. Different stages have also been provided for granting reward. 16.Next the question remains to be co....