| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1989 SLG 2600 1989 SLD 2600 (1989) 179 ITR 67 |
Rajasthan High Court
I.S. ISRANI, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
I.S. ISRANI, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Prahlad Rai Saraf
v.
State of Rajasthan*
Law:
Section:
Section 276C, read with section 276CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Offences and prosecutions - Wilful attempt to evade tax - A search was conducted at premises of petitioner in May 1981, and cash and ornaments were seized - A summary assessment was made - Petitioner filed objections against summary assessment and proceedings were pending - He had also deposited tax amount due under such summary assessment - A complaint was, however, filed by ITO under sections 276C and 276CC against assessee in September 1986 - Magistrate taking cognizance of offence, issued non-bailable warrant against him - Whether on these facts peitioner could be granted anticipatory bail subject to certain conditions - Held, yes FACTS In course of a search conducted at the petitioner's premises in May 1981 certain cash and ornaments were seized. The ITO passed the summary assessment order, and the petitioner filed objections against the said summary order which was still pending. The objections filed under section 132(11) were also pending with the department. A complaint under sections 276C, 276CC and 277 was, however, filed by the ITO against the petitioner. The Magistrate took cognizance of the offence and directed issuance of non-bailable warrant so as to effect attendance of the petitioner to face trial. Apprehending his arrest, a petition was moved by the petitioner under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, contending that (i) he had paid the total tax amount even though an appeal against the summary assessment was pending; and that (ii) he was a respectable person and was not involved in any criminal case, having no conviction to his discredit. HELD So far as the antecedents of the petitioner were concerned, there were no other criminal cases said to be pending against him. The offence under sections 276C and 276CC was such of which cognizance could be taken only when complaint was filed by the department. Thus, in the present case, it could not be said that this was a cognizable offence. The search was conducted as far back as 1981, and the complaint was filed on 12-9-1985, and the arrest was sought to be made in December 1986. The petitioner was a citizen 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