CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH :: AT HYDERABAD Dated, the 2^nd 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)

------

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 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 Sec