Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (2) TMI 133 - HC - Income TaxMaintainability of the complaint – criminal proceedings - Petitioner treated as an office in default u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act – Held that:- The criminal proceedings are independent of recovery proceedings - The criminal proceedings are not dependent on the recovery proceedings – thus, the pendency of proceedings initiated under Section 201(1) and Section 201(1-A) of the I.T. Act is not a legal impediment to continue the criminal prosecution against the petitioners - The pendency cannot act as a bar to the institution and continuance of criminal prosecution for the offences punishable under Section 276-B of the I.T. Act - the proceedings initiated against the petitioners cannot be quashed on the ground that the proceedings under Section 201(1) and Section 201(1-A) of the I.T. Act are pending – Decided against Assessee. Necessary ingredients to be filed in the complaint – Held that:- The details of non-remittance of TDS of salaries for each financial year and monthwise is also specified – thus, the complaint filed by the respondent contains the necessary ingredients for taking cognizance of offence against the petitioners – Decided against Assessee. Validity of sanction u/s 279(1) of the Act – Held that:- Section 2(35-B) of the I.T. Act specifies that there is no bar for treating more than one person as the Principal Officer for initiation of criminal proceedings – Relying upon Madhumilan Syntax Limited And Others Versus Union of India And Another [2007 (3) TMI 205 - SUPREME Court] - The subsequent event treating Sri. T. R. Venkatadri as the Principal Officer of petitioner No.1 company will not result in quashing of the proceedings against petitioner No. 2 - It is open for the Revenue to proceed against the company, its directors or any other principal officer or officers responsible for default – Decided against Assessee.
|