| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1982 SLG 745 1982 SLD 745 (1982) 133 ITR 911 |
Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 15-M OF 1976
A.S. BAINS, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 15-M OF 1976
A.S. BAINS, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Uttam Chand
v.
Income Tax Officer
Law:
Section:
Section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Offences and Prosecution - False statement in verification etc. - Assessment year 1969-70 - ITO cancelled registration of assessee-firm on statement of 'J' that firm was not genuine and that she was not its partner - However, Tribunal held that firm was genuine and that 'J' was its partner - In meanwhile revenue had filed complaint against petitioners for filing false return - Petitioners objected to said complaint contending that in view of Tribunal's finding, proceedings in complaint could not be continued - Whether findings of Tribunal are not binding on criminal courts - Held, yes - Whether since there was no legal bar against filing or continuation of criminal proceedings in instant case and prima facie complaint disclosed alleged offence and since no evidence was adduced by revenue as proceedings before Magistrate were stayed, at instance of petitioners, ground that there was no legal evidence or that no charge was proved on basis of evidence adduced was not available to petitioners - Held, yes - Whether therefore, no case for abuse of process of court was made out and criminal proceedings could not be quashed - Held, yes FACTS On the death of a registered firm, it was dissolved and one J was dropped out of the partnership and a new deed was executed between the remaining partners. The ITO granted registration to the reconstituted firm. Later on 'J' asserted before the ITO that the assessee-firm was not a genuine firm and that she was not its partner. The ITO, thereupon held that the firm was not a genuine one and accordingly, cancelled the registration. The AAC rejected appeals of the assessee-firm. On second appeal, the Tribunal allowed all the appeals and set aside the orders of the ITO and the AAC. In the meanwhile, the revenue filed a complaint against the petitioners under section 277, before the Magistrate. The petitioners' objection that the proceedings in the complaint could not continue in view of the finding of the Tribunal was rejected by the Magistrate. On petition under section 482 of Cr.PC : HELD The proceedings before the Magistrate are…
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