TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 764X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Northern Railway, were supplied by the main assessee to his Advocate. It was the main assessee, who had procured the documents from the concerned authorities and claimed the refund. Not only that, in case, the main assessee had claimed the refund on the basis of forged TDS certificates, then, the Income Tax Authorities were competent and well within their jurisdiction to reject his claim of refund and even to impose penalty under the relevant provisions of The Income Tax Act. Thereafter, the aggrieved party had a right to file the statutory appeal in this relevant connection. Be that as it may, therefore, the respondent-accused, who was an Advocate, had just submitted the income tax return on behalf of main assessee, cannot possib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent-accused was practicing on income tax side. The main assessee Ashok Kumar Sharma, Railway contractor (for brevity the main assessee ) had engaged him for the purpose of submission of his income tax returns for the assessment year 1988-89, supplied him the requisite documents, including TDS certificates in this regard. Consequently, the respondent had filled the income tax return on behalf of main assessee and claimed a refund of ₹ 3497/- on the basis of TDS certificates purported to have been issued by the Senior Divisional Accounts Officer, Northern Railway, New Delhi. The complainant-Income Tax Officer (for short ITO ) claimed that in the wake of verification, the TDS certificates were found not to be genuine and the refund w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on record against him. However, he had stoutly denied the evidence of complainant in its totality and pleaded false implication. He has also tendered into defence evidence copy of plaint (Ex.D1). 6. Sequelly, taking into consideration the totality of the peculiar facts evidence on record, the respondent-accused was acquitted, by means of impugned judgments of acquittal dated 16.8.2014 by the trial Court. 7. Likewise, the complainant-ITO did not feel satisfied and preferred the instant petitions for leave to appeal against the impugned judgments of acquittal, invoking the provisions of section 378(4) Cr.PC. That is how I am seized of the matter. 8. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, going through the record with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;s decision was based on an erroneous view of law; iii)The trial court's judgment is likely to result in grave miscarriage of justice ; iv) The entire approach of the trial court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal; v) The trial court's judgment was manifestly unjust and unreasonable; vi) The trial court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has ignored material documents like dying declarations/report of the Ballistic expert, etc. vii) This list is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive. 2. The Appellate Court must always give proper weight and consideration to the findings of the trial court. 3. If two reasonable views can be reached - one that leads to acquittal, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so facto, is not a ground, muchless cogent, to hold respondent-accused guilty for the commission of pointed offences in the absence of main assessee, as contrary urged on behalf of petitioner. 14. Strange enough, the complainant ITO had not filed any complaint against the main assessee and only arrayed the respondent Advocate as an accused, who was stated to have submitted the income tax returns of relevant years on his behalf, for the reasons best known to him (ITO). That means, the respondent-accused had only submitted the income tax return along with all the indicated documents on behalf of main assessee. In other words, all the TDS certificates, which were purported to have been issued by the Northern Railway, were supplied by the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
