TMI Blog1994 (1) TMI 57X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) and 277 read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sections 193, 196 and 420 read with section 511 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations in it are briefly as follows : The complainant is the Income-tax Officer, Ward-I(1), Madurai. He is a public servant. The complaint is filed with the prior permission of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madurai. The complaint is in respect of the assessment year 1980-81. The first accused is a private limited company. The second accused is the managing director of the first accused and in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company. The first accused is an assessee. The return of income of the first accused for 1980-81 was filed on July 4, 1981. As part of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It came to light that the first accused had fabricated its books of account by introducing unaccounted funds in the books. The accused suppressed and concealed the assessable income for the assessment year 1980-81. The accused have wilfully attempted to evade tax, penalty and interest chargeable or imposable under the Income-tax Act, 1961. Hence the complaint. Mr. N. Venkatachalapathy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, would submit that the order of assessment by the Income-tax Officer regarding this discrepancy were not accepted by the appellate forums. Hence the complaint is liable to be quashed. He would further submit that as per the guidelines and instructions given for prosecution, cases where penalties over Rs. 10,000 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could not act as a bar to the institution of criminal prosecution for the offences punishable under section 276C or section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The apex court has also held that the criminal court has no doubt to give due regard to the result of any proceedings under the Income-tax Act having a bearing on the question in issue and in an appropriate case it may drop the proceedings in the light of an order passed under the Act but it does not mean that the result of a proceeding under the Act would be binding on the criminal court and the criminal court has to judge the case independently on the evidence placed before it. In Ajantha Biscuit Co. v. Asst. Collector of Central Excise [1992] 40 ECC 202 ; [1993] LW (Crl.) 575 (Mad), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
