TMI Blog1983 (10) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e his judgment and order dated November 21, 1980, us tinder: Onkar Nath-respondent : U/s. 277, I.T. Act, 1961. R.I. for six months. U/s. 193, IPC. R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 or in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for two months. U/s. 465, IPC. R.I. for nine months. U/s. 471, IPC. R.I. for nine months. Kali Dass-respondent : U/s. 278, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndents was also directed to pay Rs. 1,000 to the State as litigation cost. The Commissioner of Income-tax has challenged the aforesaid order of the appellate court by way of this revision petition. The ground taken by the Commissioner is that the impugned order is contrary to the express provisions of the statute, i.e., s. 292A of the I.T. Act, according to which nothing contained in s. 360 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rce and the conviction was recorded after the coming into force of that provision regardless of the assessment year involved. However, the assessment year involved was earlier to the coming into force of s. 292A of the I.T Act. Although, in my view, the benefit of probation should not have been given to the respondents by the appellate court in view of the aforesaid provision, since the matter per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
