Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + SC Income Tax - 2011 (5) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (5) TMI 156 - SC - Income TaxProsecution u/s 276C(1), 277 and 278 - Posecution had led evidence to prove that revised return was filed by the firm under the name of accused Hem Raj and on that basis assessment was made by the assessing authority - There is further evidence to show that aggrieved by the order of assessing authority, appeal was preferred before the appellate authority under the signature of the accused Hem Raj, which was dismissed and the penalty was paid - At no point of time accused Hem Raj made any objection that the return did not bear his signature and was not filed by him - It is trite that admission is best evidence against the maker and it can be inferred from the conduct of the party - Admission implied by conduct is strong evidence against the maker but he is at liberty to prove that such admission was mistaken or untrue - By proving conduct of the accused Hem Raj in not raising any dispute at any point of time and paying the penalty, the prosecution has proved his admission of filing and signing the return - Once the prosecution has proved that, it was for the accused Hem Raj to demonstrate that he did not sign the return - There is no statutory requirement that signature on the return has to be made in presence of the Income-tax authority - Nothing has been brought in evidence by the accused Hem Raj that signature did not belong to him on the return and the penalty was paid mistakenly - Held that:- hat the appellate court misdirected itself in not considering the evidence in right perspective and acquitting the accused, so also the High Court which failed to correct the apparent error - This render their judgments unsustainable - Any other view may induce the appellant to compel the assessee to file return in the presence of the authority so that the signature is proved by direct evidence by such authority in trial.
|