Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2003 (4) TMI 57 - HC - Income TaxEntries in the cash book or ledger book regarding the sale - Offences And Prosecution - criminal revision petition has been directed by the Income-tax Officer - in the present case the evidence produced by the complainant is totally unworthy of credit or the same is patently absurd or inherently improbable. Thus no prima facie case is made out. It cannot be said in any manner that the respondents had intentionally or wilfully evaded to make entries in the cash book or ledger book regarding the sale of 561 bags of cement. It is also not proved on record that they had wilfully made any wrong statement. No case is made out under section 465/467/471 of the Indian Penal Code as they had not forged any document or any cash or ledger book - A businessman normally keeps 2/3 bill books at a time. I concur with the reasoning given in the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. There is no illegality or infirmity in the same. Hence the criminal revision petition is dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Alleged wilful concealment of sale of cement bags. 2. Alleged false statements and non-maintenance of books of account. 3. Alleged forgery of documents and use of forged documents. 4. Prima facie case evaluation for framing charges. Detailed Analysis: 1. Alleged Wilful Concealment of Sale of Cement Bags: The Income-tax Officer alleged that during a survey on December 14, 1982, at the respondents' business premises, it was discovered that 561 bags of cement were missing from the stock register, indicating unaccounted sales. The respondents claimed these bags were sold and dispatched to Panipat on the same day through truck No. RSB 4480 with goods receipts Nos. 260, 261, and 262. The court noted that the petitioner did not verify the authenticity of these receipts with the truck union, implying that the receipts could be genuine. Thus, the court concluded that the respondents might not have had the wilful intention to conceal the sale. 2. Alleged False Statements and Non-Maintenance of Books of Account: Vinod Kumar Jain initially claimed that the 561 bags were sold to Lala Hukum Chand Jain for Gaushala, but upon further inquiry, this was refuted by Lala Hukum Chand Jain. Later, Vinod Kumar Jain revised his statement, attributing the sale to different individuals. The court observed that the Income-tax Department failed to confront Vinod Kumar Jain and Lala Hukum Chand Jain together and did not record Lala Hukum Chand Jain's statement during the preliminary or pre-charge evidence phase. The court found that the evidence provided by the complainant was unreliable and did not conclusively prove that the respondents intentionally evaded making entries in the cash book or ledger. 3. Alleged Forgery of Documents and Use of Forged Documents: The respondents were accused of forging books of account, cash memos, and using them as genuine. The court found no evidence supporting the claim that the respondents forged any documents. It was noted that having multiple bill books is a common business practice, and the issuance of bills from different bill books did not constitute forgery. The court concluded that no case was made out under sections 465, 467, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. Prima Facie Case Evaluation for Framing Charges: The court referenced legal standards for determining a prima facie case, emphasizing that evidence should not be meticulously judged at the charge-framing stage. However, in this case, the court found the evidence presented by the complainant to be "totally unworthy of credit" and "patently absurd or inherently improbable." Therefore, it was concluded that no prima facie case was made out against the respondents. The court upheld the Sessions Judge's order discharging the respondents, finding no illegality or infirmity in the decision. Conclusion: The criminal revision petition was dismissed, affirming the discharge of the respondents due to insufficient credible evidence to establish a prima facie case of wilful concealment, false statements, or forgery.
|