Case Details

Citation(s)
1992 SLG 1491 1992 SLD 1491 (1992) 195 ITR 910
Madras High Court

ARUNACHALAM, 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

P.N. Subramaniam and Others

v.

P.C. Chadaga, Assistant Commissioner of IncomE tax

Law:

Section:

Section 276C/277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Offences and prosecutions - Wilful attempt to evade tax, etc. - Complaint was filed alleging that petitioners accused, who were partners of accused-firm, had conspired along with other accused, with a view to wilfully evade tax, defraud exchequer of its legitimate revenue and deceive concerned ITO, in which process they had fabricated false evidence in form of books of account containing false entries - Whether said allegations in complaint were sufficient prima facie to permit trial to be proceeded with against petitioners accused - Held, yes FACTS The complaint filed by the department showed that the two petitioners, who were partners of the first accused/firm, had conspired along with the other accused, with a view to wilfully evade tax, defraud the exchequer of its legitimate revenue and deceive the concerned ITO, in which process they had fabricated false evidence in the form of books of account containing false entries. The petitioners were, therefore, prosecuted for the alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 276C(1), 277 and 278B. On writ, the petitioner submitted that the allegations in the complaint would not be sufficient to issue process against the petitioners and merely quoting the provisions of the section would not suffice to prosecute them. HELD These allegations in the complaint were sufficient prima facie to permit the trial to be proceeded with against those two petitioners as well. The prosecution must be furnished an opportunity to let in evidence on the allegations made in the complaint. It will always be open to the petitioners to canvass that question before the Trial Magistrate, after evidence was brought on record. No ground had been made out to quash the pending prosecution, insofar as it related to the petitioners. The petition was dismissed accordingly. Note : The case was decided in favour of the revenue. A Raghunathan for the Petitioner. K. Ramaswamy for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Arunachalam, J.-This petition has been filed under section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, to call for the records and quash the pending prosecution in E.O.C.C. No. 997 of 1988, on the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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