| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 2526 2011 SLD 2526 (2011) 333 ITR 534 |
Supreme Court of India
P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.
P. SATHASIVAM AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.
Rajeswar Tiwariv.Nanda Kishore Roy
Law:
Section:
Section 192, read with section 200, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deduction of tax at source - Salary - Respondent, who was employee of IISCO Steel Plant, filed complaint under Indian Panel Code, 1860, against appellants-management of IISCO alleging discrimination by way of unduly deduction of income-tax from his monthly salary - He also alleged that amount so deducted was not deposited with income-tax authority and should be refunded back - High Court directed police inquiry - Appellants informed that income-tax was deducted in consonance with section 192 and was deposited in due course as tax to credit of employee/respondent in terms of section 199 as uniformly done in respect of every employee - Police submitted inquiry report stating that complaint was civil in nature - On basis of said report, High Court proceeded to issue of summons against appellants for an offence under section 406/120B of Indian Penal Code - Appellants filed application under section 482 of Cr.PC for quashing complaint but same was dismissed - Whether even if respondent had any grievance about deductions of tax, proper remedy for respondent was to approach concerned income-tax authority/officer and not to file complaint - Held, yes - Whether further, since complaint did not disclose any case to proceed against accused persons, criminal proceedings initiated against appellants were to be quashed - Held, yes FACTS In 1973, the respondent joined IISCO Steel Plant. In 1989, he was appointed as assistant foreman. In 1991, he filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking direction for considering his claim for promotion to the post of senior mechanic alleging that he was superseded by his juniors. In 1995, he filed another writ petition praying for interim order restraining the appellants from filling up the post of assistant foreman. The High Court, in the said writ petition, directed for maintaining status quo. In 2003, the respondent filed private complaint under sections 461/468/406, read with section 120B of the IPC against the appellants (management of IISCO) alleging discrimination by unduly deducting Rs. 1,640 per month from his monthly salary as income-tax. It was also stated…
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