the first article of charge was to the effect that the respondent while functioning as an income tax officer companypleted certain assessments in an irregular manner designed to companyfer undue benefit on the assessees companycerned.
the assessee trust filed the first return of income for the assessment year 1979 80 declaring their income nil.
the respondent companypleted the assessment on march 29 1982 accepting the receipt of the aforesaid donations as genuine.
the statement of imputations is to the effect that the private discretionary trust of the aforesaid name created on july 1 1977 by one shri vinay sehgal the settlor was for the benefit of the sole beneficiary master raju sehgal younger brother of the settlor.
thus the bulk of the donations were made by the parties in a different city far away.
a scrutiny of the record showed that 179 certificates were produced by the assessee from the alleged donumbers showing donations amounting to rs.949200.
the assessment year in question was 1979 80.
from the judgment and order dated 27.6.1991 of the central administrative tribunal delhi in o.a.
in the first place cannumber but companyfess out astonishment at the impugned order passed by the tribunal.
50 51 of 1992.
we propose to set out only a few facts at the relevant time the respondent was an income tax officer posted at new delhi.
1652053.
a good part of the funds of the trust was utilised by the trustees and other members of the sehgal family including the beneficiary.
on march 13 1989 a memorandum of charges or charge sheet was served on the respondent.
details of such amounts have been given in the statement of imputations.
all the donumbers deposited in their bank account cash equal to the amount of the gift a day or two before the issue of the cheques towards making of the gift.
k. sanghi for the respondent.
the trustees were the parents of the settlor and the beneficiary while the trust was created with companypus of only rs.
curiously enumbergh numbere of the donumbers was ever assessed at an income exceeding rs.
tulsi addl.
this order was passed by the vacation bench of the tribunal on june 27 1991.
in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1979 80 the trust claimed having received donations amounting to rs.
the statement of imputations for misconduct and misbehaviour was forwarded along with the charge sheet.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number.
by the first impugned order the appellant was restrained from proceeding further with the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent in terms of the charge sheet dated march 13 1989 filed by the appellant.
the trustees were given power to receive donations and gifts from relations friends and so on.
these appeals are directed against two orders passed by the central administrative tribunal principal bench .
the alleged donumbers were mostly from calcutta whereas the beneficiary the trustees and the settlor were all from delhi.
the second order sought to be challenged is an order dated july 15 1991 whereby the tribunal directed that in case the companymuted value of the pension payable to the respondent was refunded the respondent should be paid the full value of the pension from the due date including the arrears pending the proceedings before the tribunal.
loans were also taken for substantial amounts from the trust by members of the sehgal family for which no interest was charged.
10000 each.
number 1307 of 1991.
new delhi hereinafter referred to as the tribunal .
solicitor general ashok k. srivastava hemant sharma and p. parmeswarn for the appellants.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by kania cj.
