2014 (2) TMI 19 - SUPREME COURT
Sasi Enterprises Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Willful and deliberate failure to file returns - Held that - Section 276CC applies to situations where an assessee has failed to file a return of income as required under Section 139 of the Act or in response to notices issued to the assessee under S.....
2013 (12) TMI 318 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Vijay Bharti Madhok Versus Union of India
Criminal proceedings - Failure to furnish returns of income - Held that - The case of the applicant is not with regard to evasion of tax, but it merely relates to the jurisdictional error in filing the returns and there are no proceedings pending aga.....
2013 (5) TMI 128 - DELHI HIGH COURT
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Versus NILOFAR CURRIMBHOY
Failure to furnish the return - Offence U/s 276-CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - The accused/Assessee has not rendered any valid and cogent reasons for filing the Income Tax Return for the Assessment year, 1994-95 after the lapse of 7 months - Held t.....
2013 (6) TMI 284 - PATNA HIGH COURT
Anil Kumar Sinha Versus Union of India
Prosecution /s 276CC - immunity form prosecution or not - Settlement Commission, while deciding the case has granted immunities for penalty. - held that - In this case, the complaint has been filed under section 276CC of the Act which is related to n.....
2013 (7) TMI 770 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
VG. Paneerdas and Co. P. Ltd. Versus Secretary, Central Board of Direct Taxes
Compounding of offences u/s 276CC review petition - the petitioner contended that there is no bar for considering the request of the assessee for compounding the offence even if the assessee had been convicted - a criminal appeal has also been filed .....
2010 (7) TMI 197 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. INBAVALLI Versus INCOME-TAX OFFICER
Offences and prosecutions Complaints were filed against the assessee for not filing the income tax return before the statutory due date in accordance with section 139(1) of the Act and thereby rendering the assessee to prosecution under section 276CC.....
2010 (2) TMI 107 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus M. SUNDARAM
Criminal Liability under section 276CC Failure to furnish return of income The assessee ought to have filed his returns for the assessment year 1991-92 and 1992-93 on or before August 31, 1991, and August 31, 1992, respectively but returns were filed.....
2008 (11) TMI 358 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Union of India Versus Bhavecha Machinery
Offences and prosecution- The quintessence of the offence u/s 276CC of the Income Tax Act, lies in the willfulness of delay in filing return. In other words, it is not merely failure to file the return in time, which constitutes the offence. The fail.....
2008 (7) TMI 523 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
ROSHAN LAL Versus SPECIAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AND ANOTHER
Offences and Prosecution- the income-tax returns on behalf of the Hindu undivided family were not submitted well within the lime for the assessment years 1980-81 and 1981-82 and, therefore, the offence punishable under section 276CC of the Income-tax.....
2008 (4) TMI 161 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SMT. GOVINDA DEVI Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER
Petitioner won a lottery - prize money was paid to the petitioner in February, 1992 - petitioner in her return for the A.Y. 1992-93 disclosed the receipt of the prize money and also paid the tax due on it - Assessing Officer, on some misconception th.....
2008 (1) TMI 316 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
UNION OF INDIA Versus DINESH
Appellant-Union of India being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitting the present respondent for offences punishable u/s 276CC & 277 appellant has submission that the learned court below co.....
2006 (11) TMI 133 - DELHI HIGH COURT
SNP PUNJ, MAYA RANI PUNJ, NP PUNJ AND OTHERS Versus DEPUTY CIT
Prosecution for failure to file the return as required u/s139 (1) in time - petitioners were no more partners in the firm - it is not indicated as to how and in what manner the petitioners were in-charge of the affairs of the firm - it is accused No......
2006 (11) TMI 185 - DELHI HIGH COURT
SUSHIL SURI AND SANJAY SURI Versus STATE AND OTHERS
Default in depositing TDS offence summoning order - held that a Managing Director was a principal officer of a company and that if he signs and verifies a return on behalf of the company which later turns out to be false, he would be liable there is .....
2005 (11) TMI 67 - MADHYA PRADESH High Court
Rameshwar Prasad Sunderlal And Others. Versus Union of India.
Offences And Prosecution
........... delay. But the learned trial court did not consider the aforementioned proviso and did not consider the fact whether the tax payable by the applicants on the total income determined on regular assessment, as reduced by the advance tax paid by them exceeded Rs. 3,000 or not. In case, it does not exceed Rs. 3,000, the applicants could not have been proceeded against under section 276CC of the Income-tax Act. The applicants have been proceeded against and convicted without taking the aforementioned situation into consideration. Hence, their conviction cannot be sustained in law. The prosecution is also unduly delayed. The learned appellate court has also not considered the vital aspects of the matter. In the result, this revision is allowed. The conviction and the sentence imposed under section 276CC of the Income-tax Act is set aside and the accused/applicants are acquitted of the charges aforesaid. The fine if deposited, be refunded to them. Their bail bonds stand discharged.
2004 (11) TMI 15 - SUPREME Court
Guru Nanak Enterprises And Others Versus Income-tax Officer, Distt. Circle Ii, Jaipur
HC dismissed the petition filed by the appellant herein under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing the proceeding pending in the court of the Special Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur, initiated u/s 276CC read wit.....