Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
R Venkateswara Reddy vs Central Board Of Direct Taxes on 2 December, 2025
OA 021/00955/2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH :: AT HYDERABAD
OA/021/0955/2025
Dated, the 2nd day of December 2025
Hon'ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne,Judicial Member
Hon'ble Mr. Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi, Administrative Member
R. Venkateswara Reddy, S/o. late Raya Pitchi Reddy,
Gr.A Officer, aged about 57 years,
Occ: Principal Commissioner Income Tax (Central),
Ayakar Bhavan, Basheerabagh, Hyderabad,
R/o. Flat No. 303, „F‟ Block, Fortune Enclave Apartments,
Road No. 12, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad - 500 034.
..... Applicant.
(By Advocate: Mr. K. Siva Reddy)
Vs.
1. Union of India,
Rep. by its Secretary Revenue,
Government of India,
Ministry of Finance, North Block,New Delhi
2. The Chairman, CBDT,
North Block, New Delhi.
3. The Principal Director General of Income - Tax (Vigilance),
CBDT, New Delhi.
4. The Pr. ADG (V)(SZ), Chennai.
.... Respondents
(By Advocate: Mr. V. Vinod Kumar, Sr. PC for CG)
------
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU
Page 1
VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND
TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA
BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb,
SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E=
[email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU
RAO ESURU
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
OA 021/00955/2025
ORAL ORDER
(As per Hon'ble Dr.Lata Baswaraj Patne, Judicial Member) By this Original Application, the applicant is seeking the following relief(s):-
"....that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the Charge Memo in F. No. 14011/51/2025-V&L dt.26.09.2025 issued by the Respondent No.1 framing charges against the Applicant in respect of performance of the duties of quasi-judicial functions as the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai and on the same ground the integrity of the applicant was graded as doudtful and the same was challenged in OA No. 767/2025 and the same is sub- judice before this Hon'ble Tribunal and declare the same is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to law and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same.
ii) Consequently, direct the Respondents to consider the name of the Applicant for the post of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax by the DPC without taking into account the remarks recorded in APAR for the year 2022-23 and the charge memo dt. 26.09.2025 with all consequential benefits and topass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."
2. Facts of the case are that:
i) The Applicant was selected to the Indian Revenue Service (IRS) and was appointed as Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax by direct recruitment in 1994. The Applicant worked in various places in India and in various capacities and presently, he is working at Hyderabad as Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central).
ii) While so, the respondent No.1 issued the charge memo dt.
26.09.2025,levelling five Articles of charge against the applicant with regard to the appellate order passed by the Applicant in the case of Sri.T.S.Kumarasamywhile he was working as Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal-19, Chennai (for short CIT-A). Challenging the said charge memo, the present OA is filed.
3(i) It is the contention of the applicant that while discharging quasi-judicial functions as CIA-A, during the period from 10.10.2021 to 05.06.2023, his Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 2 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 reporting officer has made an entry in his APAR for the year 2022-2023 that his integrity is doubtful, which is subject matter of OA No. 767/2025 before this Tribunal. Further, the respondents have referred to the incident of receipt of complaint with regard to an appellate order passed by him in the case of Sri T.S. Kumarasamy, for which the present impugned charge memo is issued.
(ii) It is contended by the applicant that in regard to the incident covered by the impugned Articles of charge that a search u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted in the case of Sri.T.S.Kumarasamy (TSK) on 05.07.2018 and prior thereto, search was conducted in the case of Smt.VK.Sasikala (VKS) on 09.11.2017. The appeals filed against the search assessments in both the cases were pending before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 19, Chennai, which post was held by the applicant, at the relevant point of time. On going through the appellate folder of Smt. V.K Sasikala, the applicant noticed that though addition of Rs.237 crores was made under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act in the assessment order passed in the case of VKS for Assessment Year (A.Y) 2017-18 towards demonetized cash alleged to have been given by VKS to TSK, no corresponding addition was made in the assessment order of TSK for A.Y. 2017-18. Hence, on a prima facie satisfaction, the applicant has issued enhancement notice under the provisions of Section 251(1)(a) of the Act to TSK on 10.06.2022 proposing to enhance his assessment by the said amount u/s 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Act. However, after careful examination of the objections filed by TSK to the enhancement notice and on making a fair, objective and judicious appreciation of the material available on record, it was concluded by the applicant, in his capacity as a quasi-judicial authority that there is no conclusive or clinching evidence to establish that TSK had received cash of Rs.237 crores from VKS Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 3 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 during the demonetisation period. Consequently, it was held by the applicant in the appellate order of TSK passed on 03.09.2022 that the enhancement that was proposed was not warranted and accordingly, a speaking order was passed giving detailed reasons in support of the said conclusion.
iii) The Department disputed the said finding of the applicant in his capacity as a Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and filed appeal before Hon‟ble the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "ITAT") inter-alia on the following issues-
( 1) issue of enhancement notice proposing to bring the amount of Rs.237 cr to tax (2) dropping the proposed enhancement after considering all the relevant material and submissions of the assessee.
(3) not providing opportunity to the Assessing Officer before finalizing the issue of enhancement.
It is contended by the applicant that Hon‟ble ITAT, as higher appellate authority, has confirmed the action/findings of the applicant on all the three issues disputed by the Department, vide its order, dated 07.07.2023. The Hon‟ble ITAT further held that there is no error in the reasons given by the applicant to drop the proposed enhancement of assessment and since the AO was informed through the ITBA portal regarding issue of enhancement notice and subsequent hearing notice, the contention of the Revenue in the additional ground that no opportunity was given to the AO to present evidence on the issue is factually incorrect and false.
iv) It is further contended by the applicant that the allegation made in the Article of charge-1 is totally misconstrued. The material relevant to the issue of Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 4 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 enhancement in the case of TSK is already available in the assessment order of VKS, since the relevant seized material and statements of key persons gathered during the searches in the cases of VKS and TSK were extracted in the said assessment order. Hence, there was no requirement to call for the said material, once again, from the AO of VKS. Further, the appraisal report was not made available to the CIT(A) as per the prevailing practice in the Department.The applicant had bona fide reasons for not seeking the copies of relevant material found and seized during the course of search proceedings in the case of VKS and TSK and copies of relevant statements of key persons from the jurisdictional authorities. Hence, it is grossly incorrect and mischievous to allege in the Article of charge 1 that he had acted in a mechanical/hasty manner without due application of mind and without exercising due diligence. The applicant submits that detailed explanation in this regard was submitted by him to the Principal Additional Director General (Vigilance) (South), Chennai, vide letters, dated 18.07.2024 and 22.11.2024, when his version was called for in respect of the alleged lapses in the appellate order of TSK, vide letters, dated 10.07.2024 and 10.09.2024 respectively. It is further contended that specific reasons in support of the applicability of each of the alleged contraventions of the provisions of Rule 3(1) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules have not been stated in the imputations of misconduct in support of the Articles of charge. Hence, the Article of charge 1 is unsustainable.
v) It is further submitted that the allegations made in Article of charge-2 are misconceived and lack of any substance. The AO was duly informed through the Income Tax Business Application (ITB A) portal regarding the enhancement proceedings by uploading the enhancement notice as well as the subsequent Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 5 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 hearing notice and this aspect has been discussed and confirmed by the Hon‟ble ITAT. The stand of the revenue on the concerned issue of receipt of demonetized cash of Rs.237 crores by TSK is already on record since the same is duly reflected in the assessment order of VKS. As such, there was no need for specifically seeking the case of the revenue, once again, from the AO and it was open to the AO to appear before the CIT(A) in response to the enhancement and hearing notices, had he considered it necessary to present his case. As per the guidelines issued by the Board, vide letter, dated 14.02.2019, in F.No.279/Misc/M-124/2018- ITJ, it is incumbent on the part of the AO to identify top 20 cases of quality assessments and make proper representation in such cases before the CIT(A). However, there was no compliance to the said guidelines by the AO in the case of TSK, though the appeals pending in the case of TSK were, undoubtedly, falling in the top 20 cases in view of the huge demand. On the contrary, it is stated in the Articles of charge that the applicant has failed to give opportunity to the AO to provide his comments and failed to communicate the proposed enhancement issue to the Range head. The seized material and sworn statements proposed to be relied on by the applicant was stated in the enhancement notice and the same was in the knowledge of the AO. It was incumbent on the AO to bring to notice of the applicant regarding any other material relevant to the issue, which may be available with him, but not stated in the enhancement notice. However, no such intimation was received from the AO. Hence, the charge that the applicant failed to call for the appraisal reports and relevant seized materials, to verify the genuineness of the submission of TSK before holding that the enhancement is not warranted, is totally misconceived. The CIT(A) is an appellate authority, who discharges quasi-judicial functions and he is required to apply his mind independently to the material available on record and the applicable law while Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 6 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 adjudicating the appeals. The Income Tax Act itself has recognized this principle by providing in clause (b) of the proviso to Section 119 that no orders, instructions or directions shall be issued, so as to interfere with the discretion of the CIT(A) in exercise of his appellate functions. Accordingly, there are no administrative instructions or laid down procedure requiring the CIT(A) to consult his superior officers or other senior officers while disposing off the appeals as a quasi-judicial authority. Hence, the charge that the applicant failed to communicate the proposed enhancement issue with the PCIT/ the Range Head before dropping the same and thus, failed to comply with the established procedure, is wholly misconstrued and untenable.
vi) It is further submitted that the allegation made in Article of charge-3 is baseless and devoid of any merit. It is stated that, in view of the order dated 25.02.2022 of the Hon‟ble High Court in WP No.28991 of 2018 and WPMP No.24676 of 2021, the applicant was required to dispose off 29 appeals in TSK group of cases mandatorily by 03.09.2022. Accordingly, the appeals of TSK and his group concerns were disposed offvide orders dated 03.09.2022. The connected issue ofdemonetized currency of Rs.237 crores given by VKS to TSK is one of the 4 issues in the appeal of VKS for A. Y. 2017-18. The other three issues in the appeal of VKS involved additions of Rs.1693.25 crores had no connection with TSK appeal. Moreover, no written submissions in support of the grounds of appeal were filed in the case of VKS despite the issue of several hearing notices, on the ground that the copies of some statements relied on by the AO in the assessment order have not been supplied to her by the AO. Hence, the applicant had bona fide reasons for not approaching the Hon‟ble High Court to extend the time limit for disposal of appeals in the case of TSK, to enable simultaneous Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 7 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 disposal of appeals in the case of VKS. Hence, the allegations in Article of charge-3 are incorrect.
vii) It is further submittedby the applicant that the allegations made in Article of charge-4 have no merit. Since the agreed period of one year from December, 2016 for returning the cash in new currency to VKS, as stated by Sri.V.S.Sivakumar in his statement, has already lapsed by the time search took place in July 2018 in the case of TSK and no evidence was found regarding the returning of the huge sum of Rs.237 crores or payment of interest on the said sum in either of the two searches in the cases of VKS or TSK, it was reasonably inferred by the applicant while issuing the enhancement notice on the basis of the said facts and circumstances that cash of Rs.237 crores was given without consideration by VKS to TSK, thereby attracting the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Act.
Hence, it is grossly incorrect to allege that there is no prima facie case to invoke the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) in the enhancement notice. There are no administrative instructions or laid down procedure requiring the CIT(A) to consult his superior officers or other senior officers while disposing off the appeals as a quasi-judicial authority. Hence, the charge that the applicant failed to discuss such an important issue with the DGIT (Inv.) / the PCIT(Central) / the Range Heads, having jurisdiction over both the cases for holistic appreciation of facts before issuing or dropping the issue covered by the enhancement notice, is wholly misconstrued and untenable.
viii) It is submittedby the applicant that the allegations made in the Article of charge-5 are misleading and preposterous. The final decision with regard to the proposal of enhancement was required to be taken by the applicant as a quasi-
judicial authority on a fair, objective, cumulative and impartial consideration of Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 8 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 the available evidences in the light of the principles governing appreciation of evidences and the explanations furnished by the Applicant. Accordingly, the applicant has arrived at the finding that there is no conclusive or clinching evidence to establish that TSK received cash of Rs.237 crores from VKS during the demonetization period and consequently, the proposed enhancement is not warranted. The findings rendered by the applicant in the appellate order of TSK on the said connected issue cannot be considered to be weakening the stand of the revenue in the case of VKS before the higher appellate forum, since it is preposterous to consider that the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue in the case of TSK would influence or sway the decision of any of the higher appellate authorities, if it does not contain any merit. There are three levels of appellate authorities/courts above the CIT(A) viz., Honb‟le ITAT, Hon‟ble High Court and Hon‟ble Supreme Court. Hence, the proposition in the Article of charge that the appellate order passed by the applicant in the case of TSK has weakened the stand of the Revenue in the case of VKS before the higher appellate forum is not correct. The said proposition would tantamount to degrading the independent functioning of the judicial authorities. Hence, the allegation made in this regard in the Article of charge does not merit any consideration. The enhancement notice was issued by the applicant as per the provisions of Section 251 of the Act. TSK furnished his explanation and objections in response to the said notice. After considering the same in the light of the available evidences, the applicant arrived at the finding in the case of TSK, in the capacity of a quasi-judicial authority, that there is no conclusive or clinching evidence to establish the receipt of demonetized cash of Rs.237 crores from VKS. Since the enhancement proceedings were initiated as per the provisions of the Act, it was incumbent on the applicant as a quasi-judicial authority to pass a speaking order with regard to Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 9 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 the outcome of such proceedings. If the dropping of the enhancement proposal was made by way of an office note instead of passing a speaking order, as contended by the respondents, it would not have been possible for the Department to contest the applicant‟s decision before the ITAT. Hence, the allegation,in this regard is illogical, opposed to transparency and against the legal requirement.
ix) It is further submitted by the applicant that all the above charges are related to one incident only, which fell for consideration of the Hon‟ble Tribunal in the earlier OA. Admittedly, the above incident occurred while the Applicant was discharging his duties in the nature of quasi-judicial functions and he has fairly and honestly acted for the benefit of the department and issued an enhancement notice to the assessee in the case of Sri.T.S.Kumarasamy and the same was within the knowledge of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer of the respondent department, who also has the responsibility to provide the necessary documents available with him, other than the documents mentioned in the enhancement notice, which go to support and substantiate the enhancement notice issued by the applicant. It is unfair on the part of the respondents to throw the blame on the Applicant, having failed in their duties to produce the necessary documents to support and strengthen the enhancement notice issued by the applicant. As per law, the Applicant has issued the enhancement notice and after hearing the party and after perusing the records and documents available on record, the Applicant passed an elaborate and reasoned order holding that no enhancement is warranted.
The order passed by the Applicant is a quasi-judicial order and the same was challenged by filing appeals vide ITA Nos.895 to 905/Chny/2022 before the Hon‟ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai and the Hon‟ble ITAT, by its order, dt. 07.07.2023, dismissed the appeals filed by the respondents. It was Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 10 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 categorically held by the Hon‟ble Tribunal with regard to the impugned enhancement issue at Para 174 of the order that, "Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is no error in the reasons given by the Ld. CIT(A) to drop proposed enhancement of assessment and thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the Id. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the revenue". The Honb‟bleITAT further held at Para 177 of the order that "Since the AO was informed through the ITBA portal regarding issue of enhancement notice and subsequent hearing notice the contention of the revenue in the additional ground that no opportunity was given to the AO to present evidence on the issue is factually incorrect and false. Since the AO had already been put on notice, it is for the AO to exercise his right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal in accordance with sec 250(2). Therefore, we are of the considered view that the additional ground of the revenue on this issue is false and baseless and hence, rejected".
x) Thus, it is contended by the applicant that the order passed by him was tested by the department by filing appeals, wherein therespondents have taken all the pleas before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and lost their case. The charges framed against the Applicant are merely perceived procedural lapses, which are incorrect on facts. On the face of the impugned charge memo, it is clear that the charges are related to the appellate order passed by the Applicant in discharge of his quasi-judicial functions. The respondents have no jurisdiction to take any action against the applicant as the decision of the applicant has already been upheld by the Hon‟ble Income Appellate Tax Tribunal. It is not even the case of the respondents that that there was any ulterior motive or maIa fide intention behind the decision of the Applicant on the enhancement issue. The impugned charge Memo is contrary to law laid down by the Hon‟ble Apex Court Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 11 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 in the case of Union of India and Others vs. K.K.Dhawan (1993 AIR 1478) and in the case of Amresh Srivastava v State of MP in Civil Appeal No. 10590 of 2024 dt. 01.04.2025.
xi) It is also contended by the applicant that before the issuance of the impugned charge memo, the respondent issued notices and called for explanation from the appllcant on 10.07.2024 and 10.09.2024 and the applicant submitted his version on 18.07.2024 and 22.11.2024. The respondents, without considering the same, have issued the impugned charge memo mechanically and the same is unsustainable in law. The charge memo was issued only to harass the Applicant and deny him his legitimate promotion. The Applicant submits that he is presently in the zone of promotion for promotion to the post of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax since his name stands at Sl.No.55 in the order of seniority as against 65 vacancies, for which, DPC is to be held in the month of November 2025.
Apprehending that the impugned charge memo may come in the way of favourable consideration of his name for promotion by the DPC, the applicant filed this OA seeking for the relief, mentioned supra.
4. In the OA, the applicant sought an interim relief to grant stay of the Charge Memo dt. 26.09.2025 and further proceedings pursuant to the said charge memo.
This Tribunal, after hearing both sides, at length, passed interim order on 01.10.2025.
5(i) Upon notices, the respondents filed reply statement, opposing the contentions of the applicant. The respondents took a preliminary objection that this OA is filed seeking multiple reliefs and as held in catena of judgments, Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 12 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 ordinarily Tribunal/Courts shall not entertain OAagainst charge memorandum or show cause notice as it does not give rise to any cause of actionand it does not amount to any adverse order, which affects the rights of any party unless the same has been issued by a person having no jurisdiction/competence to do so. It is only when a final order imposing the punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, it may have a grievance and cause of action. Thus, a charge-sheet or show-cause notice in disciplinary proceedings should not ordinarily be quashed by the court.
(ii) It is submitted by the respondents that the charge memorandum dt.
26.09.2025 was issued to the applicant to submit his Written Statement of defence. However, without submission of written statement of defence within stipulated time, the applicant has approached this Tribunal. Hence, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to go into correctness and continuance of disciplinary proceedings at this stage. Therefore, the OA filed by the applicant is pre-mature and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine.
(iii) It is submitted that the OA No. 767/2025 was filed by the applicant on the subject matter of promotion whereas, the present OA filed by the applicant is against the charge memorandum dated 26.09.2025. Hence, the subject matter of both cases is different. Further, the APAR entry and the disciplinary proceedings are different and distinct administrative actions governed by separate rules and procedures. The integrity remark in the APAR is a part of the annual performance assessment, while the charge memorandum is based on specific acts of misconduct. The entry of doubtful integrity was based on certain material which later formed the basis of formal disciplinary action. Hence, both the actions are legally distinct.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURUPage 13 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
(iv) It is submitted that the applicant, while working as Commissioner of Income tax, Appeal-19, Chennai, issued an enhancement notice to the appellant, Shri T.S. Kumarasamy group of cases (TSK) to bring to tax demonetized currency to the tune of Rs. 237 crores, given by Smt. V.K. Sasikala (VKS) to TSK u/s.
56(2)(vii)(a) of the IT Act 1961. The applicant has issued the enhancement notice on 10.06.2022 without having obtained the relevant material, such as copies of the appraisal report in the case of TSK and VKS, various evidences found and seized during the course of search proceedings in the case of VKS and TSK and copies of relevant statements of key persons from the jurisdictional authorities.The applicant issued the enhancement notice on 10.06.2022 in the case of TSK on the basis of following evidences:
Statement of VS Shiv Kumar Statement of Sh. Tirupati Statement of Sh. Valeeswaran Entries recorded in seized TTD diaries Subsequently, on 17.06.2022, the applicant wrote to the AO directing him to furnish the certified copy ofthe relevant portion of the statements recorded from Sh. VS Shiv Kumar. It shows that the applicant was not having the requisite material such as relevant extract of the Appraisal Report in the case of TSK and VKS, various evidences found in the above searches and copies of relevant statements of key persons and the enhancement notice was issued in a very mechanical manner without due application of mind. When such important issue is being taken up for proposal of enhancement, considering the quantum involved and sensitivity of case, the applicant ought to have first obtained relevant records, seized material, statements of the key persons, Appraisal Reports and Reports from jurisdictional authorities before issuing enhancement notice. All these facts clearly point out that the officer had not Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 14 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 exercised due diligence before issuing the enhancement notice.Against the enhancement notice, the assessee filed objections on 18.07.2022. The AO has not been given opportunity to provide his comments in this case before dropping the enhancement notice. Keeping in mind the quantum of the issue involved, the applicant should have approached the PCIT or the Range Head to make the comments of the АO available in respect of the enhancement notice before dropping the same in order to protect the interest of the revenue and compliance with principle of natural justice. It is submitted that, in view of the interconnected nature of issues and evidences, it would have been better had the appeals in the group cases of TSK and VKS been disposed together. As regards, Hon'ble High Court's direction to dispose of appeal in the case of TSK within stipulated time, the CIT(A), should have brought to the notice of Hon'ble High Court the interconnected nature of issues and evidences between TSK and VKS. The provisions of Sec.56(2)(vii)(a) can be invoked only when money is received without consideration. In the instant case, there were evidences that money in the form of old cash currency belonging to VKS amounting to Rs.237 Crores was given to TSK during the period of demonetization so that the same may be returned to her after getting new currency notes. Therefore, there is no prima facie case to invoke provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act. On the other hand, such notice was having potential to weaken the addition made in the case of VKS and such addition was corroborated by various evidences found and statements recorded during the course of search in the case of VKS and TSK. Though the CIT(A) is a quasi-judicial authority, however considering the quantum and sensitivity of the issue involved, it was desirable on the part of the CIT(A) to discuss the issue with the DGIT(Inv.)/ PCIT/Range Head, having jurisdiction over both Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 15 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 the cases and appreciate complete facts before taking the decision to issue enhancement notice. It is settled law that institution of disciplinary proceedings against officer, who has committed gross negligence while discharging quasi- judicial functions is permissible.
(v) It is submitted by the respondents that the applicant has incorporated certain observations in the appellate order of TSK along with various reasons for dropping the enhancement notice. He has discussed merit of various evidences found during the course of search in the case of VKS and TSK in relation to amount of Rs.237 Cr. given by VKS to TSK including the detailed finding that such evidences do not carry sufficient evidentiary value. In a way, the CIT(A) has made certain findings w.r.t the issue of Rs. 237 Cr., which have the potential to be used in the case of VKS before the higher appellate forum.
It is a practice in the Department that in a case when a proposed enhancement notice is not taken for addition in the final order, then the subject matter of such enhancement notice is not included in the final appellate order. Further, the reasons for not making such addition are also not discussed in the final appellate order. At the most, an office note is incorporated in the record as a precautionary measure for explaining the reasons for not making such addition in the final appellate order.
(vi) It is submitted that the explanation given by the applicant in response to the Version Calling Letter issued by the Vigilance Directorate was duly considered by CVO and after taking the first stage advice from the CVC, a decision to issue charge memorandum has been issued by the competent authority. Further, the applicant has the option either to accept the charges or to deny the charges by giving his Written Statement of Defence (WSD) which Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 16 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 shall be considered by the Disciplinary Authority (DA) and if the WSD of the applicant is found to be satisfactory, there is a possibility of Disciplinary Authority taking decision in favour of the applicant. Even otherwise, the next stage of proceeding will be appointment of Inquiry Officer (IO) who is an independent authority, before whom the applicant will have multiple opportunities to present his case. If the applicant's case is strong on merits, he may get relief during the proceedings before the IO also. Even in the event of an adverse finding by the IO, the applicant still has opportunities to defend his case before the DA about the findings of the IO. It may be noted that principles of natural justice are embedded in the process at all the stages of disciplinary proceedings. However, without availing those opportunities, the applicant is attempting to thwart the process of justice by approaching this Tribunal.
(vii) It is submitted that had the applicant considered the facts of the case correctly, there was no case to invoke the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) as there were many evidences to prove that the money was given by VKS to TSK on a returnable basis along with interest. Furthermore, the issue as to whether cash of Rs.237 crores was actually given by VKS to TSK was not a matter for adjudication before the applicant. Despite that, the applicant gave his verdict that money of Rs.237 crores was never received by TSK from VKS. While coming to this conclusion, he missed few key evidences, such as the excel sheet named 'Party Payments' & sub- sheet named "Siva bricks",found and seized from the possession of Shri Valeeswaran, a key employee of TSK which clearly showed evidence of receipt of huge money by TSK from VKS during the demonetization period. The sub sheet "Siva bricks" contained details of trips I & II and the cash received during the 2 trips, which Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 17 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 corroborated the statement of Shri VS Sivakumar recorded on 11.11.2017 during the search in the case VKS. As a result, the matter reached ITAT in the case of TSK, without these key evidences and the ITAT had ruled that the money of Rs 237 crores was never paid by VKS to TSK. Hence, the averment of applicant is incorrect. The appeal against the order of Hon'ble ITAT is pending before Hon'ble High Court, Chennai. Hence, the findings of ITAT have not yet attained finality, as claimed by the applicant in his averment.
(viii) It is further contended by the respondents that the averment of the applicant that there was no requirement to call for the appraisal report and key evidences from the assessing officer is not tenable because CIT(A) is an important fact finding quasi-judicial authority and it is the bounden responsibility of CIT(A) to take decision after obtaining all the relevant facts.
Besides, the contention of the applicant that the imputations of misconduct in support of the Articles of Charge is completely silent as to how the acts specified in Article of charge 1.1 can be construed either as failure to maintain absolute integrity or failure to maintain devotion to duty or a conduct, is also not acceptable. Because, one misconduct may attract multiple conduct rules and in the instant case, the misconduct committed by the applicant has contravened the CCS Conduct Rules 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii), 3(1)(iii), 3(1)(xviii) and 3(1)(xxi) at one go. As long as, each Article of charge is substantiated by specific reasons, that is sufficient. Thus the averment of the applicant that, the Articles of charge 1.2, 2.2, 3.2, 4.2 and 5.2 have no legs to stand and the same are unsustainable, is not tenable. As stated by the applicant, independent application of mind is the cornerstone of the functioning of a quasi-judicial authority. However, for independent application of mind complete facts are Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 18 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 necessary. As regards not affording an opportunity to the assessing officer before dropping the enhancement proceedings, it is stated by the respondents that whenever any issue is decided against the AO, an opportunity of being heard should be provided to him. Since the decision was taken to drop enhancement proceedings, the AO ought to have been given information of dropping enhancement notice before deciding the issue in favour of the assessee and that would have enabled the jurisdictional authorities to furnish their say in the matter. The applicant has failed to communicate his proposed decision to drop the enhancement proceedings thereby, precluding the AO and the Range Head from making their submissions. Just sending hearing notice for enhancement proceedings on ITBA cannot be termed as following the principles of natural justice in its true spirit. Further, the applicant had the appeals of VKS and TSK pending before him and chronologically, the appeal of VKS should have been disposed earlier. Also, as per established procedure in appellate forums, connected cases are to be disposed of together. Considering the magnitude of the tax involved, sensitivity of the cases, the applicant ought to have exercised due diligence and sought additional time. Completion of the assessment relying only on assessee's submission citing the time granted by the Hon'ble High Court is not a bona fide reason. Therefore, the applicant has failed to discharge the duties with the highest degree of dedication.
(ix) The respondents further submit that there are evidences that money belonging to VKS amounting to Rs.237 Crores was given to TSK, on returnable basis and in his sworn statement recorded on 09.11.2017, Shri V S Sivakumar in reply to Q. No. 44, has clearly stated that as per the deal, the Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 19 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 value of Rs.237 crores in new currencies is to be returned by Shri T.S. Kumarasamy to Smt. V. K. Sasikala within one year and otherwise an interest @ 6% per annum is to be paid by Shri T.S. Kumarasamy. Thus, the ownership was not transferred and the money was given only for safe custody to be returned after conversion. On the contrary, there is no evidence whatsoever to draw an inference that the money of Rs.237 Crores has been received by TSK from VKS on non-returnable basis. Therefore, there is no prima facie case to invoke provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Income Tax Act. While clause
(b) of the Proviso to Section 119 provides for non-interference with the discretion of the CIT(A) in exercise of his appellate functions, it does not provide for an unfettered exercise of discretion either. The protection of Section 119 is not absolute and is meant for exercise of discretion with sufficient basis, whereas, in the instant case, the applicant has exercised his discretion in excess. Therefore, the applicant cannot take protection under Section 119.
(x) The respondents contend that the applicant‟s argument that that no evidence was found regarding the returning of the huge sum of Rs.237 crores in either of the two searches in the cases of VKS or TSK, is incorrect. In the excel sheet 'VIP' seized during the TSK search, there are entries regarding the issue of repayment. Had the applicant called for the Appraisal Report in the case of TSK, he would have come to know about the such evidence. The applicant is also incorrect in saying that finding of the CIT(A) in the case of TSK will have no influence on the appeal of VSK. It is common practice for the appellate authorities to rely on the findings of the lower authorities like the CIT(A) and the findings of the appellant as the first appellate authority will Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 20 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 definitely have a bearing on the outcome of the further appeals in the case of TSK and the addition in the case of VKS. The applicant is also incorrect in stating that it is against transparency to write 'an Office note' or 'Note not to the assessee' when dropping an issue which was initially proposed for an addition/disallowance. It is a practice among assessing officers and appellate authorities, to write 'Note Not to the assessee' while not making an addition on an issue, initially proposed for addition/disallowance, in the light of satisfactory explanation by the assessee. The appellate order passed by the applicant in the case of TSK, holding that there was no clinching evidence of receipt of money by TSK from VKS, amounts to weakening of the department's case in the case of VKS.
(xi) It is submitted by the respondents that the claim of the applicant that the matter is purely related to the applicant's function and decision as a quasi-
judicial authority, is not tenable. The applicant's actions indicate that it is not a case of exercise of fair and adequate discretion based on facts, but an exercise of discretion in excess, that too, contrary to the facts and evidence available with the department, thereby, he has failed to follow established procedures for appellate authorities of the department and failed to follow due diligence and ignored the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the applicant cannot take protection meant for quasi-judicial authorities. In regard to the claim of the applicant that the judgment of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in K. K. Dhawan case is squarely applicable in his case, the respondents submitted that in K. K. Dhawan case, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court itself laid down following criteria:
(i) Where the officer had acted in a manner as would reflect on his reputation for integrity or good faith or devotion to duty;
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU
Page 21 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
(ii) If there is prima facie material to show recklessness or misconduct in the discharge of his duty;
(iii) If he has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a Government Servant;
(iv) If he had acted negligently or that he omitted, the prescribed conditions which are essential for the exercise of the statutory powers;
(v) If he had acted in order to unduly favour a party;
(vi) If he had actuated corrupt motive, however, small the bribe may be.
As stated in preceding paras, it is clearly established that the issues were interconnected considering the nature of issues and evidences in the cases of Sh.
TS Kumarasamy and Smt. V. K. Sasikala.
(xii) The respondents further submitted that the applicant has committed the following lapses:
(a) Failed to maintain absolute integrity;
(b) Failed to maintain devotion to duty;
(c) Exhibited conduct which is unbecoming of a Government Servant;
(d) Failed to refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices;
(e) Failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities.
They further submit that in the charge memo dt. 26.09.2025, applicable criteria in each Article have been clearly mentioned.
The version issued to the applicant and the subsequent replies filed by him on 18.07.2024 and 22.11.2024 were duly considered with consultation of CVC, Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 22 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 and after considering the advice of CVC, received on 04.08.2025, the impugned charge memo dt. 26.09.2025 was issued, duly approved by the Hon‟ble Finance Minister on 23.09.2025, calling for his written statement of defence. After receipt of his written statement of defence with supportive evidence, the matter would be considered. However, the applicant has filed this OA without filing his Written Statement of Defence and therefore, there is no cause of action. Hence, the OA is premature and is liable to be dismissed in limine.
4. Heard learned counsel for both the sides and carerfully perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the parties argued on the lines of their respective pleadings, which are elaborately discussed, supra.
5. The main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the applicant that the orders passed by the applicant in the capacity of quasi judicial authority have already been tested before the appellate forum i.e. ITAT and the order passed by the applicant as CIT-A has been upheld by the learned appellate forum.
Learned counsel submitted that the applicant has got immunity and protection in respect of orders passed by him in a quasi-judicial capacity. Therefore, the respondents have no power or authority to issue the impugned charge memo, containing five Articles of charge pertaining the very same allegations, which were subject matter before the Hon‟ble ITAT, Chennai. Learned counsel submitted that on an anomymous complaint, the respondents have initiated the action, which is in contradiction to the orders of the appellate forum. By this act, the respondent authorities are going beyond their power and acting contrary to the orders of the judicial forum. Thus, the action of the respondents is not only beyond their jurisdiction, but also contumacious. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that after considering his performance including his work Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 23 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 profile and duties, as quasi judicial authority, the applicant came to be promoted to the post of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) and given posting in Hyderabad, with the same charge of quasi judicial authority. However, on the basis of the anonymous complaint, relating to the order passed vis-à-vis the assessment years 2009-10 to 2019-20 during the FY 2022-2023, the reporting officer has recorded in the APAR that the integrity of the applicant is doubtful, which, per se, is not only illegal, but also against the judicial orders. The above action of the respondents is intentional, only to deny promotion to the post of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, for which he is otherwise eligible and entitled for. Challenging the remarks made in his APAR, the applicant filed OA No. 767/2025 and this Hon‟ble Tribunal, vide order dt. 24.10.2025, allowed the said OA, by quashing and setting aside the remarks in the APAR qua his integrity. The learned counsel further submitted that the impugned charge memo emanate from the same grounds, which were already addressed by the learned ITAT, Chennai Bench, while rejecting the respondents‟ appeal by upholding the orders passed by the applicant as quasi-judicial authority.
6. Learned counsel for applicant further argued that the applicant, being CIT(A), who discharges quasi-judicial functions is required to apply his mind independently to the material available on record and the applicable law while adjudicating the appeals. Independent application of mind is the corner stone of the functioning of a quasi-judicial authority. The Income Tax Act itself has recognized this principle by providing in clause (b) of the proviso to Section 119 that no orders, instructions or directions shall be issued so as to interfere with the discretion of the CIT(A) in exercise of his appellate functions. In regard to the respondents‟ averment that the applicant ought to have submitted his written statement of defence and instead, he has approached this Tribunal straightaway, Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 24 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 without availing the multiple opportunities to defence his case, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the law is well settled that when the very issuance of charge memo, ex-facie, is illegal and manifestly arbitrary, the applicant can challenge the charge memo itself and this Tribunal is well within its powers to quash and set aside the same. Learned counsel further submitted that the exceptions carved out in the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in KK Dhawan's case, as reiterated in Amresh Srivastava‟s case are not applicable to the case of the applicant and therefore, the respondents are precluded from taking disciplinary action against the applicant in respect of the orders passed by him as a quasi-judicial authority, more particularly when the said order has been upheld by the Appellate Forum i.e. learned ITAT. Therefore, the impugned charge memo is not sustainable and is liable to be quashed and set aside.
7. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and reiterated the contentions made in the reply statement. Learned counsel argued that the applicant approached this Tribunal without submitting his Written Statement of Defence to the charge memo and therefore, the OA is liable to be dismissed as premature on this score itself. The issue involved in the OA 767/2025, filed by the applicant, has no nexus with the issued involved in this instant OA. Learned counsel pointed out that the Hon‟ble ITAT, Chennai has adjudicated the matter without the key evidences in the case viz., such as excel sheet named „Party Payments‟ & sub-sheet named "Siva Bricks", which are relevant to the addition of Rs.237/- crores in the hands of VKS, which corroborated the statement of Sri V.S. Sivakumar recorded on 11.11.2017 during the search in the case VKS. It is further argued that the appeal against the order of the Hon‟ble ITAT is pending before the Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 25 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 Hon‟ble High Court, Chennai and therefore, the findings of the ITAT have not yet attained finality, as claimed by the applicant. Learned counsel argued that the applicant has acted in excess of his discretion as a quasi-judicial authority and therefore, the protection available under the provisions of the IT Act are not applicable. Further, the exceptions carved out in the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in KK Dhawan‟s case are very much applicable to the case of the applicant and as such, the respondents are not precluded from proceeding departmentally against a quasi judicial authority in respect of order passed in the said said capacity. Therefore, there is no illegality or violation of the rules in issuing the impugned charge memo by the respondents. Thus, learned counsel prayed for dismissal of the OA.
8. Having perused the record and heard both sides at length, the issues that arise for consideration:
(i) Whether the initiation and continuation of disciplinary proceedings against the applicant, in the absence of any corrupt motive, is legally permissible when the Department has already invoked its statutory appellate remedy before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and failed therein, and whether such disciplinary action amounts to impermissible parallel proceedings that undermine the independence of quasi-judicial authorities and constitute an abuse of disciplinary jurisdiction?
(ii) Whether the Articles of charge leveled in the Charge Memo dated 26.09.2025 would fall within the ambit of the exceptions enumered in Union of India v. K.K. Dhawan, enabling the respondents to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the applicant, and if not, whether such Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 26 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 Charge Memo is liable to be set aside, as being without jurisdiction, issued without application of mind, and tainted by bias or mala fide intention? Issue No.(i )
9. It is to be noted that the applicant while discharging functions as quasi judicial authority as Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, has noticed that though addition of Rs.237 crores was made under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act in the assessment order passed in the case of VKS for the AY 2017-18 towards demonetized cash alleged to have been given by VKS to TSK, no corresponding addition was made in the assessment order of TSK for AY 2017-18. Therefore, on a prima facie satisfaction, the applicant issued enhancement notice under Section 251(1)(a) of the Act to TSK on 10.06.2022, proposing to enhance his assessment by the said amount in exercise of the power under Section 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Act. However, after a thorough examination of the objections filed by TSK to the enhancement notice and on making a fair, objective and judicious appreciation of the material available on record, the applicant, in his capacity as a quasi-judicial authority concluded that there is no conclusive or clinching evidence to establish that TSK received cash of Rs.237 crores from VKS during the demonetization period. Accordingly, the applicant passed an order on 03.09.2022 holding that the proposed enhancement is not warranted. The said order, passed by the applicant as CIT(A), was challenged by the Respondent Department before the learned ITAT, inter-alia, on the points of issuing the enhancement notice proposing to bring the amount of Rs.237 Cr to tax;
subsequently, dropping the said proposed enhancement; and not providing opportunity to the Assessing Officer (AO) before finalizing the issue of enhancement.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURUPage 27 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
10. It is to be noted that the the learned ITAT, as higher appellate forum, vide its order dt. 07.07.2023, confirmed the findings in the order passed by the applicant as CIT-A, on all the three issues, raised by the Respondent Dept, and observed that there is no error in the reasons given by the CIT(A) to drop the proposed enhancement of the assessment. It was further held by the learned ITAT that since the AO was informed through the ITBA portal regarding issue of enhancement notice and subsequent hearing notice, the contention of the Revenue that no opportunity was given to the AO to present his evidene on the issue, is factually incorrect and false.
11. We have perused the order dt. 07.07.2023 passed by the ITAT, „C‟ Bench, Chennai in ITA Nos. 895/2022 & batch filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2 (1), Chennai as well as the ITA Nos. 872/2022 & Batch, filed by Sri T.S. Kumarasamy, Prop. Christy Friedgram Industry. The relevant observations vis-à-vis the main issues raised by the Respondent department before the ITAT, are extracted as under:
"170. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The notice of enhancement was issued proposing to tax the amount of OHDs/SBNs of Rs.237 crores received by the appellant from Smt.Sasikala without consideration u/s 56(2)(vii)(a) of the Act, based on the statements of Shri.V.S.Siva kumar, Shri. Tirupati and Shri. Valeeshwaran. However, on careful examination of the contentions of the appellant, it is seen that none of the said statements have conclusively established that a sum of Rs.237 crores was received by the appellant from Smt.Sasikala. It is noticed that the loose sheet seized during the course of search in the case of Smt.Sasikala from the premises of M/s Namadhu MGR bearing page no.98 of ANN/VSU/NMN/LS-1/S contained an entry "Tirupati-7.40" and it was with reference to the said entry that Shri.Siva kumar stated that it represents commission of Rs.7.40 crores which is to be received from Shri Tirupati for facilitating the transfer of OHDs/SBNs of Rs.237 crores to the appellant on the instructions of Smt.Sasikala, for the purpose of exchanging the same with new currency. However, it is noticed that the said loose sheet does not contain any noting with regard to the alleged amount of Rs 237 crores. It is also noticed that the name of the appellant is not found noted anywhere in the said loose sheet. Moreover, as contended by the appellant, the statement of Shri.Siva Kumar that he was promised commission of Rs.7.40 crores for facilitating the transfer of amount of Rs 237 crores to the appellant does not stand to any reason as the Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 28 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 commission, if any, is to be paid by the person who seeks to convert the demonetised currency into new currency and not by the person who is providing the service of conversion of the currency. The said statement of Shri.Siva Kumar is required to be considered as unreliable in view of this inherent discrepancy. The unreliable nature of his statement is also is evidenced by the averment made by him that the appellant agreed to return the amount of Rs 237 crores in new currency within one year. Considering the fact that the only avenue available to a person to convert such huge amount of OHDs/SBNs into new currency is to deposit the amount in the bank account and declare the same under PMGKY, it is impossible for any person to return the entire amount in new currency after paying 50% tax on the amount declared under PMGKY. It is therefore evident that the statement of Shri.V.S.Siva Kumar does not in accordance with the actual facts and the same cannot be considered as credible and reliable evidence. XXX XXX
174. In this view of the matter and considering facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that there is no conclusive or clinching evidence to establish that the appellant received cash of Rs.237 crores from Smt. Sasikala during the demonetization period for conversion of the OHDs/SBNs into new currencies. The CIT(A) after considering relevant submission of the assessee held that the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) are not attracted to the facts of the appellant's case and accordingly, the enhancement proposed during the course of appellate proceedings in this respect is held to be not warranted. Therefore, we are of the considered view that there is no error in the reasons given by the ld. CIT(A) to drop proposed enhancement of assessment and thus, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and reject grounds taken by the revenue.
XXX XXX
177. As regards the contention of the revenue that no opportunity was given to the AO by the CIT(A) while deciding the enhancement proposal which is against the procedure prescribed in the Act, since Section 250(1) requires that notice be given to the appellant and the AO and sec 250(2) states that the AO has the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal. The revenue contended that the AO was denied opportunity to present evidence on the issue. With regard to the said contention of the revenue in the additional grounds, it is noticed that the same is contrary to the facts on record for the simple reason that the notice of enhancement is dated 10.06.2022 and is uploaded in the ITBA portal on the same date as evidenced by the receipt of said notice by the appellant through e-filing portal. Since the notice is uploaded on ITBA portal, the same is available for view by the AO and the AO was very much aware of the enhancement proceedings before the first appellate authority. Further, on a request made by the appellant dated 14.06.2022 to the CIT(A) for a copy of sworn statement of Mr.V.S.Sivakumar which was referred to in the enhancement notice, a letter dated 17.06.2022 was addressed by the CIT(A) to the AO of Smt.Sasikala with a copy marked to the Add.CIT Central-2 Chennai, who also happens to be the range head of the AO of the appellant. The said letter was uploaded in ITBA portal on 20.06.2022 as evidenced by the receipt of said letter by the appellant through e-filing portal. Since the letter is uploaded on ITBA portal, the same is available for view by the AO of the appellant and the AO was very much aware of the enhancement proceedings due to this reason. The Range head of the AO of the appellant is also aware of the enhancement proceedings since the letter was marked to him as stated above. The notice of hearing under Section 250 of the Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 29 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 Income Tax Act dated 30.06.2022 which was issued after the issue of enhancement notice was also uploaded in ITBA portal as evidenced by the receipt of said notice by the appellant through e-filing portal. Since the AO was informed through the ITBA portal regarding issue of enhancement notice and subsequent hearing notice, the contention of the revenue in the additional ground that no opportunity was given to the AO to present evidence on the issue is factually incorrect and false. Since, the AO had already been put on notice, it is for the AO to exercise his right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal in accordance with sec 250(2). Therefore, we are of the considered view that the additional ground of the revenue on this issue is false and baseless and hence, rejected. Xxxxxxx
186. In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in ITA Nos. 895 to 905/Chny/2022 for assessment years 2009-10 to 2019-20 are dismissed and appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos. 872 to 879/Chny/2022 for assessment years 2012-13 to 2019-20 are partly allowed."
Accordingly, the appeals filed by the respondent Department were dismissed by the learned ITAT, upholding the order passed by the applicant.
12. Thereafter, the impugned charge memo dt. 26.09.2025 has been issued to the applicant on the very same allegations, in connection with the Appealate order passed by the applicant, which were also raised in the appeal before the learned ITAT. The Articles of Charge leveled against the applicant read thus:
"ARTICLE - 1 1.1 That the said Shri. R. V. Reddy, while working as Commissioner of Income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai, issued an enhancement notice to the Applicant, Shri T.S. Kumarasamy group of cases (here-in-after TSK) to bring to tax demonetized currency to the tune of Rs. 237 crores, given by Smt. VK. Sasikala (here-in-after VKS) to TSK u/s. 56(2)(vii)(a) of the IT Act 1961 (herein-after Act). The CIT(A) has issued the enhancement notice on 10.06.2022 without having obtained the relevant material such as copies of the appraisal report in the case of TSK and VKS, various evidences found and seized during the course of search proceedings in the case of VKS and TSK and copies of relevant statements of key persons from the jurisdictional authorities; and thus he acted in a mechanical/hasty manner without due application of mind and without exercising due diligence.
1.2 By his aforesaid acts, Shri. R. V. Reddy, the then Commissioner of income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai (a) failed to maintain absolute integrity; (b) failed to maintain devotion to duty, (c) exhibited conduct which is unbecoming of a Government Servant, (d) failed to refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices, (e) failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities, thereby contravening the provisions of Rule 3(1 )(i), 3(1 )(ii), 3(1 )(iii), 3(1 )(xviii), and 3(1 )(xxi) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 respectively.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURUPage 30 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 ARTICLE- 2
2.1 That the said Shri. R. V. Reddy, while working as CIT(A)-19, Chennai held that the enhancement is not warranted based on the reply from TSK without calling for a specific report from the Assessing Officer; thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The CIT(A) failed to call for the appraisal reports and relevant seized materials, to verify the genuineness of the submission of TSK before holding that the enhancement is not warranted. The CIT(A) failed to provide opportunity to the AO to provide the comments in this case before dropping the issue covered by enhancement notice when TSK filed objections on 18.07.2022. Further, keeping in mind the quantum and sensitivity of the issue involved, the CIT(A) has failed to communicate the proposed enhancement issue with the PCIT/ the Range Head before dropping the same and thus failed to comply with the established procedure. Therefore, the officer has not followed due procedure before dropping the issue covered by proposed enhancement notice.
2.2 By his aforesaid acts, Shri. R. V. Reddy, the then Commissioner of income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai (a) failed to maintain absolute integrity; (b) failed to maintain devotion to duty, (c) exhibited conduct which is unbecoming of a Government Servant, (d) failed to refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices, (e) failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities, thereby contravening the provisions of Rule 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii), 3(1)(iii), 3(1)(xviii), and 3(1)(xxi) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 respectively.
ARTICLE -3 3.1 That the said Shri. R. V. Reddy, while working as Commissioner of Income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai, during the course of appellate proceedings in the case of TSK for the AY 2017-18 being aware that the appeals in the cases of TSK and VKS have interconnected issues and evidences failed to dispose both the appeals together. The CIT(A) failed to put any effort to bring to the notice of Hon'ble High Court the interconnection of the issues and evidences between the cases of TSK and VKS for extension of time for disposal of appeal in the case of TSK. Further, the CIT(A) also failed to expedite the disposal of appeal in the case of VKS so that the interconnected issue between TSK and VKS could have been taken to logical end by deciding both the appeals together.
3.2 By his aforesaid acts, Shri. R. V. Reddy, the then Commissioner of income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai (a) failed to maintain absolute integrity; (b) failed to maintain devotion to duty, (c) exhibited conduct which is unbecoming of a Government Servant, (d) failed to refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices, (e) failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities and thereby contravening the provisions of Rule 3(1)(i), 3(1 )(ii) , 3(1 )(iii), 3(1 )(xviii) and 3(1)(xxi) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 respectively.
ARTICLE-4 4.1 The CIT(A) further failed to note that the provisions of Sec.56(2)(vii)(a) of the IT Act 196 1, could not have applicability in the case of TSK as the demonetized currency was given to TSK by VKS on returnable basis. There was no prima facie Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 31 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 case to invoke the provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) in the case of TSK as there were ample evidence to corroborate that the demonetized currency was belonging to VKS and was given to TSK, so that same to be returned back to her after getting new currency note; particularly on such facts addition of Rs. 237 Cr. had been already made in the hand of VKS u/s 69A of the Act for A.Y 2017-18. Moreover, the CIT(A) failed to discuss such an important issue with the DGIT(Inv.)/ the PCIT(Central)/the Range Heads having jurisdiction over both the case for holistic appreciation of facts before issuing or dropping the issue covered by the enhancement notice. All these facts clearly point out that the officer had not exercised due diligence before issuing the enhancement notice and it was issued in a hasty manner without due application of mind. Further the CIT(A) decided that the enhancement is not warranted without comprehensive evaluation of all the evidences available with the AO. By this act, the officer has failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities. 4.2. By his aforesaid acts, Shri. R. V. Reddy , the then Commissioner of income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai (a) failed to maintain absolute integrity; (b) failed to maintain devotion to duty, (c) exhibited conduct which is unbecoming of a Government Servant, (d) failed to refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices, (e) failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities and thereby contravening the provisions of Rule 3(1)(i), 3(1)(ii), 3(1 )(iii), 3(1 )(xviii), and 3(1)(xxi) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 respectively.
ARTICLE -5 5.1 That the said Shri. R. V. Reddy, while working as Commissioner of Income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai, incorporated certain findings in the final appellate order in the case of TSK for A. Y. 2017- 18 wherein he had discussed the merit of various evidences found and statements recorded during the course of searches in the case of VKS and TSK w.r.t transfer of Rs. 237 Cr. The detailed discussion, wherein the CIT(A) has given findings that such evidences are not credible, potentially weakens the case of Revenue / AO w.r.t addition of Rs. 237 Cr. made u/s 69A in the case of VKS; without examining all the evidences comprehensively. Moreover, such act of the CIT(A) by making detailed factual findings as above in respect of the proposed issue covered by the enhancement notice in the final appellate order is against the established practices and procedure; particularly when the proposed enhancement issue hm been dropped. At best such findings could have been part of office note by explaining the reasons for dropping the issue covered by enhancement notice. It may adversely affect the stand of the Department/Revenue, before the higher appellate forum in the case of VKS.
5.2. By his aforesaid acts, Shri. R. V Reddy , the then Commissioner of income tax, Appeal- 19, Chennai (a) failed to maintain absolute integrity; (b) failed to maintain devotion to duty, (c) exhibited conduct which is unbecoming of a Government Servant, (d) failed to refrain from doing anything which is or may be contrary to any law, rules, regulations and established practices, (e) failed to perform and discharge his duties with the highest degree of professionalism and dedication to the best of his abilities and thereby contravening the provisions of Rule 3(1)(i), 3(1 )(ii), 3(1 )(iii), 3(1 )(xviii), and 3 (1 )(xxi) of tire CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 respectively."
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURUPage 32 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 A careful perusal of the above Articles of Charge would make it clear that the same pleas of the respondent department, in connection with the Appealate order passed by the applicant, have been answered by the ITAT against the Revenue Department in the Appeals, referred to above.
13. Further, it is to be noted that based on an anonymous complaint/ source complaint, the respondents made remarks in the APAR of the applicant for the year 2022-23 that his integrity is doubtful. Aggrieved by the same, the applicant approached this Tribunal in OA No. 767/2025 and vide order dated 24.10.2025, this Tribunal allowed the said OA by quashing the said remarks in the APAR with regard to his integrity, with a direction to the respondents to consider the applicant‟s case for promotion to the post of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.
Further, on the basis of very same complaint, received by the respondents on 24.02.2023, which is evident from the chronology of events stated in para 4 of the reply statement, the respondents have initiated the action, which culminated in issuing the impugned charge memo. However, there is no whisper about the said complaint in the Articles of charge or the statement of imputations of misconduct, nor the said complaint is enlisted in the list of documents in Annexure-III to the charge memo. The respondents have also not filed a copy of the said complaint along with the reply statement. Therefore, there is violation of principles of natural justice in furnishing the details of the said complaint to the applicant.
Thus, the respondent department has tried to penalize the applicant, initially by making entries in his APAR that his integrity is doubtful, which has been set aside by this Tribunal in the earlier OA. Further, taking the very same complaint as the basis or initial point, the respondents have processed the DAR case of the applicant. However, the Articles of charge leveled in the impugned charge memo Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 33 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 are on the same issues, which were considered in detail and rejected by the Appellate Tribunal in ITA Nos. 895/2022 & Batch, filed by the Revenue Department. It is to be further noted that the order passed by the applicant as a quasi judicial authority is dated 03.09.2022 and the same has been upheld by the Hon‟ble ITAT vide order dt. 07.07.2023, whereas, much thereafter, the impugned charge memo was issued on 26.09.2025. Thus, as pointed by the learned counsel for applicant, the respondents have acted deliberately and intentionally to deny promotion to the applicant for the post of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, for which, he is very much within the zone of consideration.
14. In this regard, it is pertinent to rely on the case law, decided by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court as under:
(i) Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar v. Union of India, (1999) 7 SCC 409 The Supreme Court held that where the act or order of a quasi-judicial authority is subject to appeal or revision, disciplinary proceedings on the very same issues amount to impermissible parallel proceedings unless mala fides or motive of corruption are alleged. The Court observed:
"If the act or omission is appealable or revisable, disciplinary proceedings on the same ground would amount to parallel proceedings and are impermissible."
In the present case, the Department has already preferred appeals before the ITAT against the applicant‟s appellate orders and has failed in those appeals.
Initiating disciplinary action on the same grounds constitutes a collateral attack on judicial findings and is clearly barred.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURUPage 34 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
(ii) Ravi Malik v. State of Haryana, (2004) 10 SCC 1 The Supreme Court reiterated that when the statute provides a complete appellate mechanism, disciplinary proceedings cannot be invoked to question the correctness of a judicial or quasi-judicial order. The Court held:
"Disciplinary action is not a substitute for appeal. Where the matter is appealable, initiation of disciplinary proceedings on the same reasoning amounts to re-litigation and is impermissible."
The applicant‟s appellate orders were already subjected to scrutiny in appeals. Therefore, the continuation of disciplinary proceedings after the Department‟s defeat before the learned ITAT amounts to exactly the kind of re-
litigation, which is impermissible.
(iii) Ramesh Chander Singh v. High Court of Allahabad, (2007) 4 SCC 247 In this case, the Supreme Court stressed that a judicial officer cannot be proceeded against departmentally for a judicial order that is merely considered erroneous. The Court held:
"Judicial orders must be corrected in appeal or revision. To subject a judicial officer to disciplinary action for a judicial order amount to parallel adjudication and is destructive of judicial independence."
The principles apply with full force to the applicant, who acted as a statutory appellate authority. The Department‟s grievance concerns his judicial conclusions, which have already been tested in appeal. Thus, disciplinary proceedings cannot be maintained. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court has consistely rejected attempts to punish judicial reasoning through disciplinary tools. Any such attempt violates the constitutional principle of independent judicial/quasi-
judicial functioning.
Thus, the issue No (i) is answered against the respondents.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURUPage 35 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 Issue No. (ii):
15. We have perused the judgments cited by applicant. In the case of K.K.Dhawan, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court carved out the situations wherein the Government is not precluded from taking disciplinary action against a quasi-
judicial authority and it was held that mere technical violations or the fact that an order is wrong, if not falling under the enumerated instances, does not warrant disciplinary action. In a subsequent judgment in the case of Amresh Srivastava, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, observed that when it appears that the order has been passed in good faith, without any indication of dishonesty and the facts outlined in the show cause notice do not suggest any such impropriety, the charge sheet issued to the delinquent official would not fall within the scope of the exceptions carved out in K.K.Dhawan case, thereby precluding the authorities to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings. The relevant observations of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Amresh Shrivastava v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors, in Civil Appeal No. 10590 of 2024, in its judgment, dt. 01.04.2025, while adverting to its earlier judgment, in Union of India & Ors v. K K Dhawan, (1993) 2 SCC 56, are extracted as under:
"9. Further reliance was also placed upon the judgment of this Court in Zunjarrao Bhikaji Nagarkar vs. Union of India and Others, (1999) 7 SCC 409, where this Court had held the quasi-judicial officer's error in judgment does not automatically imply misconduct or favouritism. Disciplinary action requires clear evidence of extraneous influence beyond mere legal mistakes to avoid undermining judicial independence. Similarly, in case of Krishna Prasad Verma through Lrs. vs. State of Bihar and Others, (2019) 10 SCC 640, this Court clarified that while wrong orders by judicial officers should not automatically lead to disciplinary action unless there are allegations of misconduct based on extraneous influences. The remedy under such circumstances would be available to the parties concerned to avail all the remedies available under law. It was further reiterated that unless there are clear cut allegations of misconduct, extraneous influences, gratification of any kind etc., disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated merely on the basis that a wrong order has been passed by the judicial officer or merely on the ground that the judicial order is incorrect. Xxxx Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 36 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
14. The facts as have been narrated above are not in dispute. Two aspects which need to be considered are:
(1) Whether the chargesheet issued to the Appellant by the Respondent-
State would fall within the scope of observations that have been carved out by this Court in K.K. Dhawan case (supra)?
(2) Xxx
15. As regards the first question in K.K. Dhawan case (supra), this Court carved out the following situations where the government is not precluded from taking disciplinary actions for violation of the Code of Conduct: -
"(i) Where the officer had acted in a manner as would reflect on his reputation for integrity or good faith or devotion to duty;
(ii) If there is prima facie material to show recklessness or misconduct in the discharge of his duty;
(iii) if he has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a Government servant;
iv) if he had acted negligently or that he omitted the prescribed conditions which are essential for the exercise of the statutory powers;
(v) if he had acted in order to unduly favour a party;
(vi) if he had been actuated by corrupt motive however, small the bribe may be because Lord Coke said long ago "though the bribe may be small, yet the fault is great."
After carving out the above exceptions, this Court proceeded to further observe that mere technical violations or the fact that an order is wrong, if not falling under the above enumerated instances, does not warrant disciplinary actions. It was further reiterated that each case depends on its facts, and absolute rules cannot be postulated. The above instances as referred and reproduced hereinabove, are thus only a guide and not meant to be mandatorily adhere to without exception.
16. In the present case, we are of the considered view that the charges alleged against the Appellant in the chargesheet fall under the category of a wrongful order, which does not appear to have been influenced by extraneous factors or any form of gratification. It appears that the order has been passed in good faith, without any indication of dishonesty. Furthermore, the facts outlined in the Show Cause Notice do not suggest any such impropriety. The power exercised by the Appellant in his capacity as a Tehsildar, while passing the order of Land Settlement Order, cannot be considered of a nature that would warrant disciplinary proceedings against him. The decision relied upon by the Counsel for the Appellant as mentioned above, supports this view. Consequently, the first question is answered in favor of the Appellant."
(emphasis added) On a careful reading of the said judgments of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, we are of the view that the same are squarely applicable to the case of the Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU Page 37 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025 Applicant. It is to be noted that the order passed by the Applicant in discharge of his quasi-judicial functions was upheld by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and more over, the facts outlined in the Articles of charge do not suggest any corrupt motive or mala fide intention behind the decision of the Applicant on the enhancement issue so as to bring it within the scope of the exceptions carved out in K.K.Dhawan case, as reiterated in Amresh Shrivatsava case.
16. We are surprised to note that under what authority the respondent department is exercising their jurisdiction for issuing the impugned charge memo leveling the above allegations when the action of the applicant as a quasi-judicial authority, has been upheld by the learned ITAT in the appeals filed by the respondent department, as mentioned above and in the absence of any corrupt motive or mala fide intention on the part of the applicant. It is as good as questioning the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal under judicial review by the Department, which is not only impermissible under law, but also exhibits clear bias and malafide intention of the Department. As pointed out by the learned counsel for applicant, when the applicant is due for promotion to the post of Chief Commissioner since he is in the zone of consideration, just to deny him promotion, for which he is otherwise eligible and entitled for, the respondents have deliberately made remarks in the APAR as well as issued the impugned charge memo. In fact, the impugned action is also contumacious as this shows disregard, disrespect to the orders of the Appellate Tribunal. Further, in view of the judgment in the matter of KK Dhwan and Amresh Shrivastava (supra), the respondents do not have any authority to raise the objections on the order passed by the applicant as a quasi-judicial authority, in the absence of any corrupt motive or mala fide intention, and once it has been confirmed by the Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the Appeal.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU
Page 38 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
17. As referred to above, none of the Articles of Charges (1 to 5) satisfy the exceptional circumstances (corrupt motive, undue favour, recklessness, deliberate violation of statutory mandates) enumerated in KK Dhawan (Supra) case, for initating disciplinary proceedings against a quasi-judicial functionary. Therefore, the respondents are legally precluded from initiating disciplinary action against the Applicant. Accordingly, the charge memo is not sustainable in law.
Thus, the Issue (ii) is answered against the respondents.
18. CONCLUSION:
(A) The Department had, in fact, invoked its appellate remedies before the Hon‟ble ITAT and lost the appeals. Subsequent to that, in the absence of any corrupt motive or mala fide intention on the part of the applicant, the disciplinary action initiated against him constitutes impermissible parallel proceedings. Hence, continuation of such proceedings would erode the independence of quasi-judicial authorities and amount to abuse of disciplinary jurisdiction. (B) The Charge Memo, dt. 26.09.2025, issued by the respondents doesn‟t contain any allegation of malafides, corruption, undue favour, negligence or deliberate violation of law and accordingly, do not fall within the permissible situations enumerated in K.K.Dhawan (Supra). Therefore, the impugned charge memo is unsustainable in law, as having been issued without application of mind, beyond their authority, and with bias and malafide intention.
19. ORDER:
(A) Consequently, the charge memo, dt. 26.09.2025, is hereby quashed and set aside.
(B) The respondents are directed to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Chief Commissioner of Income Tax in the ensuing DPC, in accordance with law.
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU
Page 39 VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 OA 021/00955/2025
20. In the result, the OA is allowed, with the above directions. No order as to costs.
(VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI) (DR. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
/evr/
Digitally signed by VISWESWARA RAO ESURU
Page 40
VISWESWARA DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND
TRAINING, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET=NO 5-10-193 1ST FLOOR HACA BHAWAN HYDERABAD, Phone=0e901e723fea8352e441786b540b9508e216375b29f0256f1b1f7659293369eb, SERIALNUMBER=d046cc70fb37100c36240d3e23862fbf9be922f9e6f5b1358ef8dc2f9d1f8936, E= [email protected], CN=VISWESWARA RAO ESURU RAO ESURU Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.12.12 18:07:13+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0