2015 (3) TMI 103 - HC - Income Tax

Contempt of Courts - withdrawal of the affidavit and the allegations - Held that - Given the nature of the conduct displayed by Sh. Gupta, i.e. preferring an application for intervention which was rejected, thereafter engaging in e-mail communications with the Standing Counsel and levelling allegations against them; addressing e-mails directly to this Court and finally, placing on record an affidavit detailing the allegations even while stating that he would withdraw some of them vis-a-vis the Standing Counsel, but would nevertheless press those allegations against the same individuals elsewhere, prima facie amounts to criminal contempt punishable in accordance with law. This Court has been informed that two of the Standing Counsels - Sh. Balbir Singh and Sh. Rohit Madan, who had previously appeared, have already recused themselves from the matter. The behaviour outlined above amounts to seeking to prejudice and interfere or tending to interfere with the due course of proceedings in the present appeals. Thus consequently appropriate action and further proceedings under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 is warranted. In the circumstances, Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta is issued with Show Cause Notice, returnable on 09.04.2015 to give his explanation why he should not be proceeded with under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in respect of the above allegations.

Summary

Issues:
1. Allegations of misconduct and contempt of court against an intervener.
2. Compliance with court orders regarding withdrawal of allegations.
3. Criminal contempt proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Issue 1: Allegations of Misconduct and Contempt of Court
The judgment details the intervener's actions, including sending a detailed fax to the court with serious allegations against the Revenue and Income Tax Department officials. The intervener accused the Income Tax Department of presenting a weak case deliberately and highlighted instances of alleged misconduct and forgery. The intervener further stated that tax officials and taxpayers were misleading the court, which amounted to contempt of court. The court noted that the intervener's conduct, including levelling allegations against the Standing Counsel and engaging in email communications, prima facie amounted to criminal contempt. The court issued a show-cause notice to the intervener, directing him to explain why he should not be proceeded against under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Issue 2: Compliance with Court Orders
When the intervener was asked to unconditionally withdraw the affidavit and allegations, he agreed conditionally. He expressed willingness to withdraw some allegations against the Standing Counsel but intended to press those allegations elsewhere. The intervener clarified that he did not wish to withdraw other allegations against Income Tax Department officials and the CIT. The court observed that the intervener's behavior, despite agreeing to withdraw some allegations, still amounted to seeking to interfere with the due course of proceedings. This led the court to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against the intervener under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Issue 3: Criminal Contempt Proceedings
The court found the intervener's conduct serious enough to warrant further proceedings under Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. A show-cause notice was issued to the intervener, returnable on a specified date, requiring him to explain why he should not face contempt charges. The court directed the Registry to register a separate criminal contempt proceeding and include the intervener's affidavit and related communications as part of the record. The court emphasized the seriousness of the situation and the need for appropriate action to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.

This summary provides a detailed analysis of the judgment, outlining the issues involved and the court's decision regarding the allegations of misconduct and contempt of court against the intervener.