| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2836 2004 SLD 2836 (2004) 271 ITR 38 |
Madras High Court
CRL. R.C. Nos. 1005 AND 1006 OF 2002 DECEMBER 5, 2003
A. PACKIARAJ, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
CRL. R.C. Nos. 1005 AND 1006 OF 2002 DECEMBER 5, 2003
A. PACKIARAJ, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Dr. K. Palvannan
v.
Assistant Commissioner of IncomE tax
Law:
Section:
Section 276CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Offences and prosecution - Failure to furnish return of income - Assessment years 1983-84 to 1987-88 - Six cases were instituted against assessee for failure to file returns for relevant assessment years - Of six cases, three cases were tried before trial court and remaining cases were stayed by High Court in quash petitions - Trial court acquitted assessee in three cases, High Court, however, dismissed quash petitions in respect of three other cases - Accordingly, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate convicted assessee for offence under section 276CC - Whether in view of fact that time had been granted by department for submitting returns and, accordingly, assessee submitted his returns, it could be said that no offence was made out - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, impugned order of conviction was to be set aside - Held, yes R. Shanmugasundaram and S. Ravi for the Petitioner. Ramaswamy K. for the Respondent. JUDGMENT A. Packiaraj, J. - Since the issue involved in the two revisions are one and the same, I deem it fit to pass a common order. 2. The petitioner has been convicted for offence under section 276CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court and pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default to undergo 45 days rigorous imprisonment by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, in C.C. Nos. 17 and 18 of the 1992 against which appeals were filed in C.A. Nos. 14 and 15 of 2001 before the Additional District Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No. 2), Madurai, who confirmed the conviction but reduced the sentence to one of fine of Rs. 1,000, in default to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment. Aggrieved by the same, the present revision has been filed. 3. Inasmuch as two courts have already gone into the facts and given concurrent findings holding the accused guilty, it may not be necessary for me to go into the facts and circumstances of the case again. Moreover, this court sitting in revision is called upon to satisfy itself with the correctness, legality and propriety of the orders passed by the courts below, and not to reappraise the evidence. Suffice it for the…
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