9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll up to the time when the return were required to be filed and the Karta had transferred his liability in this regard to his son. Therefore, the petitioner could not be said to have consented or connived with the karta of the Hindu undivided family in the late filing of the returns. As the offence shall be deemed to have been committed on the date when the returns were required to be filed, the involvement of the petitioner after this date could not be sufficient to show that he consented or connived in the last filing of the returns. Mere participation of the petitioner in the income tax proceedings could not be a ground to fasten upon him the liability for commission of any offence under the act as the offence had already been committed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act as the offence was committed with his consent and connivance. This allegation against accused No. 2, Roshan Lal, was precisely made in paragraph 11 of the complaint. 3 . I have heard Mr. V. K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant, Roshan Lal, Mr. R. K. Upadhyay, learned standing counsel for the Income-tax Department and perused the record. 4. As the karta of the Hindu undivided family is Ram Lal, hence no request has been made on his behalf in this petition. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that by virtue of section 140 of the Income-tax Act primarily the karta of the Hindu undivided family is liable to file the return and as Ram Lal was the karta of the Hindu undivided family, he was serve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing ill during the period when the returns were liable to be filed, hence it was the sole and sole concern of the present applicant, Roshan Lal, to file the returns and if the returns were not filed well within the time, hence it shall be deemed that the applicant, Roshan Lal, had consented and connived with the karta of the Hindu undivided family in the late filing of the returns and thus he is guilty of the offence with the aid of section 278C(2) of the Income-tax Act. 7. After hearing learned counsel for both the sides, I am of the view that the argument of the learned counsel for the Income-tax Department is not an acceptable one. 8. It does not appear from the complaints that the complainant came with this allegation that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
