TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e income-tax return for the assessment year 1988-89. They had received cash deposits from April 15, 1987, to May 1, 1987, amounting to Rs. 22,000 and further sum of Rs. 68,812 on two different dates, i.e., March 2, 1988 and March 9, 1988. The depositors have confirmed the deposits by their affidavits. Section 269SS of the Act provides that no person can take or accept a deposit or loan otherwise than by means of account payee cheque or account payee bank draft if the amount of such loan or deposit is Rs. 10,000 or more in a year. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the respondent who had received the abovesaid amounts in cash have contravened the provisions of section 269SS of the Act. The petitioner called upon the respondents, by i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... According to the petitioner, the provisions of section 269SS of the Act were upheld by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court, and also that against the decision in Kumari A. B. Shanthi's case [1992] 197 ITR 330 (Mad), the Supreme Court has not only granted special leave but also stay. So far as the omission of section 276DD from the Act is concerned the case of the petitioner is that the said section was deleted with effect from April 1, 1989, whereas, the offence committed was prior to April 1, 1989, and therefore, the complaint is maintainable. So, according to the petitioner, the respondents should not have been discharged. A reply has been filed by the respondents urging that in view of section 397(3) of the Criminal Procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the learned Magistrate on April 6, 1989. Violation of section 269SS of the Income-tax Act was punishable under section 276DD of the said Act. But section 276DD has been deleted with effect from April 1, 1989. Therefore, the respondents contend that when the provision for punishing the violation of section 269SS has been deleted on April 1, 1989, itself, the respondents cannot be punished on the basis of a complaint lodged on April 6, 1989, and, therefore, the discharge of the accused-respondents on this ground is proper. But, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the offence was committed between April 1987, to March 1988, when section 276DD was there in the statute, and the fact that the same was deleted on April 1, 1989, wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers/assessees cannot be, therefore, deprived of the benefit of the amendment." Ultimately, the High Court quashed the proceedings. The Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT (Asst.) v. Vijaya Finance [1998] 231 ITR 137, also upheld the dismissal of a complaint under similar circumstances, by holding that the Department filed the complaint for the deposits accepted by the respondents otherwise than by cheque or bank draft after the omission of section 276DD of the Income-tax Act, and, there fore, the complaint was rightly dismissed by the Magistrate. These two decisions clearly support the contention of the respondents. In these circumstances, I find no grounds for interference under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
