9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar Gupta's intervention application, being No.57792008 was rejected. He had, however, sent an e-mail to counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue, levelling several allegations which were shown to the Court. In the course of hearing, the Court pointed this out to Sh. Rakesh Kumar Gupta, who stated that he would be withdrawing the allegations levelled against the Revenue's counsel. Having regard to this development, the Court recorded on 15.01.2015 as follows "2. Learned counsel submitted that in the light of these allegations they wish for further clarification from CBDT 3. Mr. Gupta is present in Court and he states that he would withdraw the allegations and that he may be permitted to address arguments in the Court instead." 2. Sh. Gu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecided in favour of Tax Payers, by stating that tax payers are allowed Tax planning. In this case Key-man Insurance Booklet was removed, which prove assignment was illegal. Tax department had also not informed, other illegality involved (like fund siphoning by key person by transferring company assets below their fair value (without shareholder permission). Illegal acts are not called Tax planning). In ITA 3982009 and ITA 4842009 index Page and Page 3-4 of affidavit (relevant Para 5 Start from Page 3 and ends on Page 4 signed by Sr. Standing Counsel Mr. N.P. Sahni and Jr. Standing Counsel Mr. Ruchesh Sinha. To help the tax payer, terms was used incomplete assignment instead of illegal assignment. And enclosed At Page 46-48. List of Key man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Tax official in these cases. Detail of deliberate wrong actions by Income tax official XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX C. Summarized Brief Particulars of the case is already given to Court vide lettere-mail dated 15102014 & 1412015. There are two issue (of tax evasion pending above ITAwrits) related to false evidence created by tax payers and in the knowledge of Standing Counsel of Income Tax, all the connected Income Tax officials and all concerned Assessee. Issue One these parties Escorts Limited, Big Apple Clothing, Dr. Naresh Trehan & AAA Portfolio became owner of EHIRC hospital (Delhi Society by fraud)." XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX 11. Tax payers as well Tax departments Action of deliberately misleading Hon'ble Delhi High Court is contempt of Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls 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, i.e. ITA 14282006, ITA 20112010 and ITA 12622011 and in W.P.(C) 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
