2002 (12) TMI 65 - HC - Income Tax

Learned magistrate acquitted the accused-respondents of the offences punishable under section 276DD read with section 278B - In the Amendment Act of 1987, also there was no saving clause inserted for the pending proceedings. That being so, in the light of the decision of the apex court, the pending proceedings against the accused-respondents cannot continue under the repealed provisions, but a fresh proceeding for imposition of penalty may be initiated under the new provision, i.e., section 271E - no grounds are made out for interfering with the judgment of acquittals rendered by the trial court in the relevant criminal cases against the respective accused-respondents.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against acquittal under section 276DD read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act - Interpretation of Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with appeals by the Union of India against the acquittal of accused-respondents under section 276DD read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act. The accused-respondents received cash deposits in contravention of section 269SS of the Income-tax Act. The prosecution was initiated post a show cause notice, but the trial court acquitted the accused-respondents. The key issue was the interpretation of the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987, which deleted section 276DD and introduced section 271D for penalties related to section 269SS violations.

The court considered the law laid down by the apex court in the case of Kolhapur Cane Sugar Works Ltd. v. Union of India and a decision of the same court in Parmanand Das Brij Bhushan Das v. Union of India. It noted that the alleged offences predated the Amendment Act of 1987, but the prosecution was initiated post its enactment. The court highlighted that section 276DD was deleted, and section 271D was introduced without a saving clause for pending proceedings. Citing the apex court's ruling, the judgment emphasized that repealed provisions are obliterated as if they never existed, and pending proceedings cannot continue under the repealed law.

Based on the legal position and absence of a saving clause in the Amendment Act, the court concluded that the pending proceedings against the accused-respondents could not continue under the repealed provisions. It noted that fresh proceedings for penalties could be initiated under the new provision, i.e., section 271E of the Income-tax Act. Consequently, the court found no grounds to interfere with the trial court's acquittals. As a result, the appeals filed by the Union of India were dismissed, and the accused-respondents' bail bonds were canceled. The judgment provided clarity on the application of the law post the Amendment Act of 1987 and the implications for pending criminal proceedings involving repealed provisions of the Income-tax Act.