9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1218X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocated at Modipara, Sambalpur and was an income tax assessee for the relevant period. Accordingly, for the assessment year 1980-81, the respondent-accused filed a return showing her income at Rs. 8,860/- (Rupees Eight Thousand and Eight Hundred Sixty) and accordingly, the Income Tax Officer (hereinafter referred to as ITO) accepted such return, but the said ITO in the course of investigation, could know that the respondent accused had constructed a costly building at Modipara without disclosing the source of such investment and, thereby, the ITO reopened the assessment proceeding by doubting the correctness of the return so filed by the respondent-accused. In the course of investigation, the statement of the respondent accused was recorded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the complaint in which the prosecution examined 2(two) witnesses and relied upon 11 documents as against no oral evidence whatsoever, but the acknowledgement receipt under Ext.-A by the defence. After appreciating the evidence upon hearing the parties, the learned trial Court passed the impugned judgment acquitting the respondent accused of the charge, which is assailed in this appeal by the Union of India. 3. In the course of hearing the appeal, Mr. S.S. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the learned trial Court by erroneously appreciating the evidence, acquitted the respondent-accused, but the prosecution has clearly established the guilt of the respondent for the charge U/Ss. 276(G)/277 of IT Act and, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y manner whatsoever to evade any tax, penalty or interest chargeable or imposable under this Act. Similarly, offence U/S.277 of IT Act can be established by way of evidence that such persons made a statement in any verification under this Act or under any rule made there under or delivered an account of statement, which is false, and which he either knows or believes it to be false or does not believe it to be true. 5. Although the Appellant was charged for offence U/S. 276(C) of the IT Act, but the evidence of P.W. 1 transpires that the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment doubting concealment of the income by the accused as she had constructed a house in Modipara at Sambalpur with huge investment and there is a provision under the I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was working as an Income Tax Officer, Sambalpur since August, 1988, but P.W. 2 in his evidence has stated that he had received the returns filed by the accused. The Income Tax Act, however, permits filing of revised returns as has been admitted by the witness earlier and the accused had filed a second return by which she accounted for incurring a loan of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) from one Gyan Singh Sandhu, Barai Palli, Sambalpur and it was admitted by P.W. 1 that the second return of the accused under Ext. 4 relates to assessment year 1980-1981, but the loan taken by the accused was disbelieved by the Income Tax Authority and it was, accordingly, treated as concealment of income, but P.W. 1 has in fact admitted in cross-ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
