Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 39 - HC - Income TaxCommission of offence u/s 276B r.w.s 278B of Income Tax Act and Sections 409, 34 of IPC - Failure to pay tax to the credit of Central Government under Chapter XII-D or XVII-B - accused persons were responsible for deductions of tax from the payments of the contractors, employees and others of HEC, Ltd. but on several occasions the accused persons have not deposited the deducted tax 2, within the stipulated period under the Income Tax Act, with the authority - as argued Petitioner was a retainer and not a regular employee and not responsible for deducting tax from any one - HELD THAT:- It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is not an employee of HEC, Ltd. The petitioner being not the employee of HEC, never had any control over the affairs of the company including the liability of deducting tax from the employees or the contractor and 4 depositing the same with the department. The petitioner neither falls within the definition of “Assessee”, “Principal Officer” nor an “Employee”. He was also not part and parcel of the management of HEC. The complaint also does not specify any overt act against the petitioner nor it has a single sentence to the effect that the petitioner is responsible for any of the acts which can attract any penal consequences nor it mentions that he was responsible for the daily affairs of the company. This Court after taking into consideration all these aspects has quashed issuance of summons and process against the petitioner [2015 (6) TMI 1254 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] This Court finds that there is no material to summon the petitioner in the instant case by the Court below. Accordingly, the order taking cognizance passed u/s 276B read with 278B of Income Tax Act and Sections 409, 34 of IPC is quashed and set aside. Misc. Petition is allowed.
|