| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 3732 2006 SLD 3732 (2006) 285 ITR 413 |
Madras High Court
CRIMINAL O. P. Nos. 9363 OF 1989, 7683 OF 1991 AND 8990 OF 1993 JANUARY 12, 1994
PRATAP SINGH, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
CRIMINAL O. P. Nos. 9363 OF 1989, 7683 OF 1991 AND 8990 OF 1993 JANUARY 12, 1994
PRATAP SINGH, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
N. Mani
v.
Chief Commissioner of IncomE tax
Law:
Section:
Section 277 of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Offence and prosecution - Wilful attempt to evade tax - Respondent had filed a complaint against petitioners under different sections of Indian Penal Code, 1860, and section 277 - Petitioners filed instant petition wherein their case was that certain parts in complaint were quashed and certain offences were also quashed, yet complaint was not withdrawn and new complaint filed after deleting portions which were struck off, and that evidence had been let in on basis of very same complaint and that had caused prejudice to them r - Whether in view of fact that it was not direction of court that complaint should be withdrawn and fresh complaint should be filed after deleting portions which were quashed, objection raised by petitioner to that effect had got no force whatever - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, instant petition was to be dismissed - Held, yes FACTS The respondent had filed a complaint against accused Nos. 1 to 20, out of whom the petitioners were accused Nos. 6, 13, and 19 respectively for offences under sections 120B, 420, 467, 471, 197, 182, 181, 177, 193, 468, 196, 199, 200, 201, 380, 379, 417 and 420 read with sections 511 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code and section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with sections 120B and 109 of the Indian Penal Code and section 419 read with section 511, IPC. To quash the same as against them, A-6, A-13 and A-19 had filed instant petitions. The case of petitioners was that certain parts in the complaint were quashed and certain offences were quashed, that yet the compliant was not withdrawn and new compliant filed after deleting the portions which were struck off, and that evidence had been let in on the basis of the very same complaint and that had caused prejudice to the petitioner. HELD It was seen from records that it was not the direction of this court that instant complaint should be withdrawn and a fresh complaint should be filed after deleting the portions which were quashed. That being the case, the submission that instant complaint ought to have been withdrawn and a fresh complaint should be filed after deleting the portions, had got no force whatever. In view of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492