The Delhi High Court has ruled that giving a reward to someone who reports the GST evasion is up to the officers’ discretion. This means that while informants can be awarded for their details, they cannot demand or desire these rewards as a right.
The Court was acknowledging a Writ Petition submitted on the fact that the applicant was not considered for the grant of reward as per the Notification issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (Anti Smuggling Unit).
The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh stated, “…..In the opinion of this Court, the grant of an award or a reward to an informer is a discretionary grant and prima facie, the Petitioner is not entitled to challenge the order-in-appeal, since the status of the Petitioner is that of an informer. Such a person cannot create a lison the ground of claiming an award and contest the private Respondent on merits.”
Advocate Kumar Utkarsh represents the applicant, and Advocate Gaurav Sharma represents the respondent.
The applicant’s case was that she had given details of the wrongdoings and evasion of GST via one M/s Shakti Enterprises. Before the said entity, a Show Cause Notice (SCN) was then issued, which culminated in an order raising a demand, and thereafter, penalties were charged.
But in a plea, the decision was altered and penalties raised against the partners of M/s Shakti Enterprises were set aside, along with some of the tax demands. Subsequently, only a few minor demands have been raised in the order-in-appeal. The applicant, who is an informer in the proceedings, is not pleased by this.
Read Also: Indian Tax Authorities Uncover ₹7 Trillion in GST Evasion Across 91,000 Cases Over 5 Years
The Court questioned the Counsel for the applicant for the maintainability of the petition, emphasising that no individual has the right to claim an award or reward.
The Counsel, there is a substantial list of clients of M/s Shakti Enterprises who deposited TDS, and noted that the taxable value was incorrectly assessed by the Department, resulting in a minimal demand being raised in the order-in-appeal.
While the department’s counsel relied on the decision of the Apex court in Union of India & Ors. v. C Krishna Reddy (2003) to claim that a writ of mandamus could not be issued at the command of an informer.
The court sought the presence of the informer in court and posted the case for the subsequent hearing dated December 18, 2025.
| Case Title | XY vs. Union of India |
| Case No. | W.P.(C) 15498/2025 |
| For Petitioner | Mr Kumar Utkarsh |
| For Respondents | Mr Gaurav Sharma, Ms Manpreet Kour, Ms Samiksha Godiyal, Mr Tenzing N Bhutia, Mr BD Rao Kundan |
| Delhi High Court | Read Order |
