KARACHI, March 21: The Supreme Court has reinstated a grade-20 income tax officer with effect from the date of his compulsory retirement. Income tax commissioner Amin-i-Ajam was serving in Karachi when he was suspended in April 1997 along with 86 other officers for living beyond means. A 1996 evaluation report had declared his performance ‘outstanding’ for almost doubling the revenue target of his zone (‘F’ Karachi).
A departmental inquiry, however, found him guilty of purchasing a car for Rs527,000 without permission from the competent authority; having cash balance of Rs320,000, portfolio charges of Rs220,000 and prize bonds worth Rs500,00, which were not commensurate with the known sources of his income; and assets amounting to about Rs1 million in the name of his children. He was compulsorily retired in March 2000.
The officer challenged the finding and penalty by a departmental appeal and approached the Federal Service Tribunal for want of response.
A two-member FST bench returned a split verdict but the appeal was dismissed in 2001 when the tribunal chairman concurred with one of the members. He challenged the FST verdict in the Supreme Court. His counsel, Syed Shahanshah Hussain, argued that that he purchased the car through a company owned and managed by the federal government and the funds utilised were mentioned in his declaration of assets.
The omission to seek a formal permission was inadvertent. As for cash balance and prize bonds, he had submitted documents accounting for them, which were ignored by the inquiry officer.
The Supreme Court agreed with the FST member (Mehmoodul Haq Thanvi) who had accepted Mr Ajam’s appeal and reduced the penalty from compulsory retirement to censure.
The findings of the other member, Dr Akhtar Hasan Khan, were found ‘based on conjectures, surmises and his personal knowledge’. The FST chairman was held to have upheld Dr Khan’s opinion without giving sound and cogent reasons.
Allowing the appeal last month, the bench, which consisted of Justices Rana Bhagwandas, Syed Saeed Ashhad and Hamid Ali Mirza, ordered the appellant’s reinstatement ‘with all back benefits’.
