Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2022 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 374 - HC - Income TaxValidity of order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi upholding the issuance of Charge Memo - issuance of Charge Memo to the Officers of Rank of Commissioner - petitioner submits that the order is erroneous in facts and in law because a fundamental error has been committed, in the issuance of the purported Charge Memo to the petitioner on 26.06.2018, apropos his duties as Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3, New Delhi - HELD THAT:- The rule governing issuance of Charge Memo to the Officers of Rank of Commissioner is spelt out in Office Order No. 205/2005 dated 19.07.2005, it states that “approval for issuing Charge Memo/sanction prosecution” lies with the Finance Minister. Apropos the authority to issue such Charge Memo, the respondent had so clarified through a RTI reply, that sanction was not granted by the Union Finance Minister. In the said reply, the respondent has admitted that Chairman, CBDT gave approval for initiating penalty proceedings against the petitioner. That being the position, the initiation of the proceedings against the petitioner is without due sanction, against the prescribed rules and would therefore be deemed as non est. The impugned order has noted that the Minister of State for Finance (MoSF) is not subordinate to the Union Minister of Finance. From Office Orders make it clear that where the Appointing and Disciplinary Authority is the President of India, only the Finance Minister would be the authority concerned before whom the matters concerning such officers would be placed. The petitioner is a Group- A officer in the rank of the Joint Commissioner, his Appointing and Disciplinary Authority is the President of India. Therefore, only the Finance Minister would have had the jurisdiction apropos issuance of any Charge Memo or other related proceedings against the said officer. A reference has been made in the impugned order to the dicta of Supreme Court in Union of India and Others vs. B.V. Gopinath [2013 (9) TMI 1219 - SUPREME COURT] However, the Government of India has itself clarified that the sole authority to issue Charge Memo or initiate any disciplinary proceedings against a Group – A Officer or an Officer whose appointing authority is the President of India, would lie with the Finance Minister. The issuance of the Charge Memo cannot be sustained and is accordingly, set aside as being without due sanction, against the rules and as non est.
|