Reply to CCCIT 1 and DGIT dated 11-10-2004

Pankaj S Mody
C/o Shri S S Modi
40 BMM society
Paldi ,
Ahmedabad 6
Email id: psmody@yahoo.com

October 11,2004

To

The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax -I & Director General of Income Tax (INV.) ,
1st floor
Aaykar Bhavan
Ashram Road
Ahmedabad

Subject: - Your letter dated September 21,2004 in response to my letter dated 3-3-2003

1. I am grateful for the reply received under your letter DG/AHD/PSM/2004-05 dated September 21,2004 signed by Shri Rajiv R. Singh on your behalf.

2. I am extremely happy to note that the Income tax department has promptly and within the period of less that one month of my open grievance on 22-08-2004 (Sunday) has positively responded to my grievance against the happy-go-lucky attitude towards the tax evaders. In this connection, may I take this opportunity to question you as to what were the special circumstances and reasons which prompted the earlier authorities to deliberately avoid to furnish constructive response to my genuine complaint of tax evasion by certain companies /individuals/tax advisers ?

Sir, I am sure that you will agree with me that failure on the part of the concerned authorities to furnish a detailed reply to my letter dated 3-3-2003 reflects nothing but deliberate carelessness and high handedness in discharge of official duties against the informants like me.

Sir, by this letter , I request you to furnish views on plausible explanation in defence to my allegations as , as narrated by you in the beginning of Para 2 of your reply dated September 21,2004:- “ The various issues raised in your petition were examined by the authorities concerned at the relevant point of time and all actions considered necessary in the matter have already been taken”. Now Sir, tell me , when various issues raised in my petition where allegedly examined by the authorities concerned at the relevant point of time and as admitted all actions considered as necessary in the matter have already been taken, then what prevented the authorities to promptly inform me accordingly. This needs to be clarified by you and I expect your precise and concise reply at an early date.

3. This leaves the last question – Any prudent student of Income Tax Laws will consider the reply “The various issues raised in your petition were examined by the authorities concerned at the relevant point of time and all actions considered necessary in the matter have already been taken” will consider vague and meaningless unless supported by cogent evidence. In the circumstances , I humbly request you to please give me a brief understanding of
(a) various issues raised ;
(b) steps taken by the different and concerned tax authorities ;

(c) Nature of findings by tax evasion or otherwise and
(d) actions taken.

Sir, the information , if prepared honestly by you and your officers in the proforma given above will prove the transparency or otherwise ,prevailing in the income tax department. I hope to hear from you on this point, no sooner the data is got prepared by you. Sir, you will agree with me that if you prepare the chart and have a honest look at that , you will realise that many important points and allegations have remained un-investigated.

4. Sir, I have read the last sentence of your reply dated September 21,2004 , with great amusement no matter under correspondence on a serious matter like tax evasion cannot be treated as closed –unilaterally and failure to satisfactorily conclude the correspondence would tantamount to deficiency in service.

5. I do not have residence of my own and hence , kindly send reply to my above e mail address.

Thanking you.



Yours sincerely,

Pankaj S Mody