| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1988 SLG 1614 1988 SLD 1614 (1988) 170 ITR 667 |
Punjab and Haryana High Court
SUKHDEV SINGH KANG, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
SUKHDEV SINGH KANG, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Devi Dayal
v.
Union of India
Law:
Section:
Section 277, read with Section 271(1)(c), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Offences and prosecutions - False statement in verification - Whether mere filing and pendency of an appeal against imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) will be a bar to continuation of proceedings in a civil court - Held, no - Whether sections 277 and 278 are constitutionally valid - Held, yes Facts The petitioners were partners in a firm. According to the ITO they had purchased 1,376 bags of gram dal which were not accounted for in the books of the firm. The ITO added profits on account of business not shown in the books. He also found that the return did not disclose the true income and the petitioner No. 1 had signed it knowing it to be false. On appeal, the addition was reduced to Rs. 41,000. Thereafter penalty under section 271(1)(e) was imposed for concealment. An appeal against the penalty was pending before the Tribunal. The ITO filed a criminal complaint under section 277 against the petitioners. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed a writ to the High Court challenging the constitutional validity of sections 278 and 279 and also validity of the criminal proceedings against him. Held Simply because the Commissioner (Appeals) had deleted part of the additions from the additions made by the ITO, it could not be said that criminal complaint against the petitioners could not proceed in relation to the addition of Rs. 41,000 also. What was the effect of deletions made by the Commissioner (Appeals) will be a matter to be gone into by the trial court. Mere filing of an appeal by the petitioner against the imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) will not be a bar to the continuance of the proceedings in a criminal court. If and when any order favourable to the petitioners has been passed or may be passed by the departmental authorities, that surely can be produced by him before the trial Magistrate and there is no doubt that due weight and consideration shall be given to that order. No argument has been raised to assail the constitutional validity of section 277 and rightly so, because the constitutional validity of section 52 a similar provision in the Indian Income-tax Act,…
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