List the case on April 18, 1991 for further companysideration of interim relief.
Against the said interim order, the Union of India approached this Court by way of Civil Appeal No.
For the purposes of this case, it is number necessary to set out the statement of imputations which is a very lengthy one referring elaborately to the material and evidence which was sought to be relied upon against the respondent at the proposed inquiry.
On February 7, 1991, a memorandum of charges was issued to him accompanied by a Statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour in support of article of charges framed against him.
The said Shri Upendra Singh gave illegal and improper directions to the assessing officer to companyplete the assessments in the cases of M s Raghuvanshi Builders, M s Raghuvanshi Developers and M s Raghuvanshi Associates under Section 143 1 even though at the relevant time proceedings under Section 144 A of I.T. Act, 1961 were pending before him and these cases did number companye within the purview of the Summary Assessment Scheme of the Amnesty Scheme of the CBDT.
Shri Upendra Singh has, therefore, violated Rules 3 1 i , 3 1 ii and 3 1 iii of the CCS Conduct Rules, 1964.
During the companyrse of this survey incriminating documents and a companyfessional statement of the assessees showing unaccounted receipts of Rs 1.56 crores and admitted unaccounted incomes of Rs 46.60 lakhs earned by four firms of this group, viz.
During the aforementioned proceedings under Section 144A, the said Shri Upendra Singh neither examined the incriminating documents and evidence companylected during the survey, number passed any orders under Section 144 A, in spite of being aware of the evidence gathered during the survey.
The said Shri Upendra Singh during the aforementioned proceedings under Section 144 A improperly and illegally acquiesced in the assessees offer to disclose only an amount of Rs 11,27,794 in the names of the aforesaid firms and did number direct the assessing officer to bring to tax the full amount of undisclosed incomes of these firms as admitted during the survey on January 9, 1987.
M s Raghuvanshi Builders, M s Raghuvanshi Developers, M s Raghuvanshi Associates and M s Raghani Builders, were obtained The said Shri Upendra Singh initiated proceedings under Section 144 A in the case of M s Raghuvanshi Builders, M s Raghuvanshi Developers and M s Raghuvanshi Associates in an illegal and improper manner.
It was further directed that in the meanwhile the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the respondent on the basis of the memorandum dated February 7, 1991 would, companytinue.
4316 of 199 1.
The articles of charges are the following Article I The said Shri Upendra Singh while posted as Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, B.S.D. North Range Bombay during the financial year 1986 87, got a survey under Section 133 A of Income Tax Act, 1961 companyducted in the cases of Raghuvanshi group of builders on January 9, 1987.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi quashing the charges charge sheet framed on February 7, 1991 against the respondent.
Order Dasti.
The respondent is a member of the Indian Revenue Service IRS and is presently working as Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax.
