2000 (1) TMI 58 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Petitioner seeking writs for quashing letters and directing payment of final reward.
2. Discrepancy in reward amount awarded to the petitioner.
3. Interpretation of the Scheme for rewarding informants of tax evasion.
4. Discretion of the authority in determining reward amount.
5. Claiming reward as a matter of right.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 seeking writs to quash certain letters and to direct the payment of a final reward. The petitioner provided valuable information about the evasion of Central Excise Duty by a public sector undertaking. The petitioner claimed to be entitled to a reward of 20% of the amount evaded, which was not fully granted by the authorities. The Scheme for rewarding informants of tax evasion outlined specific criteria for determining rewards, including the specificity and accuracy of information, risk undertaken, and the nature of help provided. The authority had the discretion to determine the reward amount based on various factors mentioned in the Scheme. The court noted that the Scheme clearly stated that the reward was an ex-gratia payment and could not be claimed as a matter of right. The court emphasized that the determination of the reward amount was within the authority's discretion, considering multiple factors outlined in the Scheme. Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the matter could not be agitated in that forum, as the determination of the reward amount involved factors beyond the scope of the petition.

This judgment highlights the importance of understanding the discretionary nature of reward schemes and the specific criteria considered in determining reward amounts. It underscores that rewards are ex-gratia payments and cannot be claimed as a matter of right. The judgment also emphasizes the significance of adhering to the guidelines and factors outlined in the Scheme while assessing reward claims.