VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

730 DECISION - 363
(363)
(A) Misconduct — in judicial functions
(B) Misconduct — in quasi-judicial functions
(i) Disciplinary action can be taken against an
Income Tax Officer for misconduct in the discharge
of quasi-judicial functions in completing
assessments. So also for misconduct in the
discharge of indical functions.
(ii) Types of cases where disciplinary action can be
taken, specified.
(C) Bribe — quantum of
Though the bribe may be small, yet the fault is great.
Union of India vs. K.K. Dhawan,
1993(1) SLR SC 700
Disciplinary proceedings were instituted against an Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay on a charge that while
functioning as Income Tax Officer, he completed nine assessments
in an irregular manner, in undue haste and apparently with a view to
conferring undue favour upon the assessees concerned and thereby
failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and exhibited
a conduct unbecoming of a Government servant.
On the contention that the action taken by the officer was
quasi-judicial and should not form the basis of disciplinary action,
the Supreme Court observed that the officer who exercises judicial
or quasi-judicial powers and negligently or recklessly or in order to
confer undue favour on a person is not acting as a judge. What is
in question is not the correctness or legality of the decision of the
officer but his conduct in discharge of his duties as an officer. The
legality of the orders with reference to the nine assessments may
be questioned in appeal or revision under the Act. But the Government
is not precluded from taking the disciplinary action for violation of the
Conduct Rules. The Supreme Court concluded that disciplinary action
can be taken in the following cases : (i) where the officer had acted in