2020 (2) TMI 572 - HC - Indian Laws

Anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case being Economic Offence (Complaint) Case registered under section 276B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - HELD THAT - As a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of ₹ 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge (Economic Offences), Ranchi, in connection with Complaint Case being Economic Offence (Complaint) Case No. 9 of 2018 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case and other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case under section 276B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail concerning a Complaint Case under section 276B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, fearing arrest. The allegation was that the petitioner, with TAN RCHS02630F, deducted TDS but failed to deposit ?23,48,358.00 to the Central Government Accounts within the stipulated period. The petitioner referenced a letter from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Circle, Ranchi, regarding a mix-up with another individual, Sanjay Banka, who mistakenly used the petitioner's TAN number. The petitioner clarified his no objection in this matter, leading to the resolution of the issue. The petitioner's counsel argued that no offense under section 276B was established, and the petitioner was willing to cooperate with the trial.

The State and the Income Tax Department opposed the anticipatory bail plea, mentioning a lack of response from the Income Tax Department officer regarding the referenced letter. Despite the opposition, the court considered the submissions and facts presented. The court concluded that the petitioner should be granted anticipatory bail. In case of arrest or surrender within four weeks, the petitioner would be released on a bail bond of ?25,000 with two sureties of the same amount each. The release was subject to the condition that the petitioner cooperates with the trial and complies with the provisions of section 438(2) Cr. P.C.

This judgment reflects a detailed analysis of the circumstances surrounding the petitioner's request for anticipatory bail in connection with an alleged offense under the Income Tax Act. The court carefully considered the arguments presented by both parties, focusing on the petitioner's explanation regarding the TAN number confusion and willingness to cooperate with the legal proceedings. Ultimately, the court decided in favor of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, outlining specific conditions to be met upon release.