9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 946X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing of the order dated 11.08.2022 passed in Complaint Case No. 593(C) of 2011 by the learned Special Judge, Economic Offence, Patna whereby the petition filed by the petitioner under Section 245 Cr.P.C. seeking discharge has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is an income tax assessee. For the assessment year 2009- 2010, the last date for filing income tax return was 31.08.2009 in terms of Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is further submitted that the petitioner for some reason beyond his control was not able to submit his return of income tax for the assessment year 2009-2010 by the last date i.e. 31.08.2009. It is next submitted that since petitioner could not file his return by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... again received a notice dated 07.02.2011 (Annexure-4 to the quashing application) under Section 276CC of the Income Tax Act wherein it was recorded that earlier notice dated 11.01.2011 was sent but no reply of the same was submitted within seven days of the receipt of the said letter as such a second opportunity is being given to submit the reply by 15.02.2011. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner vide his reply dated 14.02.2011 replied the notice dated 07.02.2011 addressed to the Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 1(2) Bhagalpur wherein he recorded that the delay was a routine delay on account of lack of knowledge and health illness and the delay was not willful. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel for the petitioner rebuts the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Income Tax Department and submits that the order dated 31.03.2011 is cryptic and lacks in essential details. It is further submitted that the order dated 31.03.2011 takes note of the notice dated 22.10.2010 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act but then the order does not even remotely reflect that the authority had considered the other two notices as recorded hereinabove was also issued to the petitioner to which the petitioner had replied rather in one line it has been stated that the reply of the assessee is not satisfactory but then does not assign any reason for arriving at a conclusion that as to why and on what basis the authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
