2002 (10) TMI 29 - HC - Income Tax

The only ground by learned counsel for the petitioner in these applications is that there is no delay in the filing of the returns and as soon as he was served with notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on March 21, 1990, he immediately filed the same on March 30, 1990, without any delay and as such, the prosecution cannot be maintained. - At this stage, the counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an aged man and man of sick. Under those circumstances, the petitioner is at liberty to file an application to dispense with his appearance before the trial court. - It is also contended by counsel for the petitioner that the penalty proceedings and interest proceedings, all ended in his favour. This submission, in my view, does not merit acceptance because the result of the penalty proceedings and interest proceedings would not cause any impact on the prosecution, and especially when the prosecution alleges that returns have been filed only after long delay of 123 months.

Summary

The High Court of Madras dismissed the applications to quash proceedings related to delayed filing of income tax returns. The court stated that the delay of 123 months in filing returns should be decided during trial, and the petitioner cannot avoid prosecution. The court also rejected the petitioner's request to dispense with his appearance in court, citing previous penalty and interest proceedings favoring the petitioner as irrelevant to the prosecution case.