9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment and order. 2 Special Criminal Application No. 1273 of 1992 is filed by the petitioners, original accused, for an appropriate order quashing and setting aside the\, proceedings launched by the Income-tax Department by way of Criminal Case No. 251/92 pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad, and also to quash and set aside the order passed by the learned Addl. Chief Metr6politan Magistrate dated March 27, 1992, in issuing the summons upon the petitioners in the said criminal case. 3 Special Criminal Application No. 1274 of 1992 has been filed by the petitioners, original accused, for an appropriate order quashing and setting aside the proceedings launched by the Income-tax Department by way of Crimina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1985 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, stating "depreciation of Rs. 2,19,169 and investment allowance of Rs. 91,198 is allowed to be carried forward." The above ass order accepting the method of charging the retention money held back by the clients to be debited to the profit and loss account was passed on March 30, 1985. On May 1, 1985, the Petitioner-company filed return for the assessment year 1985-86 showing loss of Rs. 13,01,641 with a similar note like earlier years in the notes forming part of accounts and debited to the profit and loss account the amount of retention money. It is the case of the petitioners that by the time, the said assessment was taken up, in the next year's account ending on May 30, 1985, for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income-tax (Appeals) against the above penalty order. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal. The petitioner-company preferred an appeal to the Income tax Appellate Tribunal being I. T. A. No. 4778/91. When the afore said appeal was pending the Income tax Department instituted a Criminal Case No. 251/92 for the offence under section 276C (1) and 277 read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act and Criminal Case No. 252/92 for the offence under sections 177, 193, 196 and 199 read with sections 34, 109 and/or 114 of the IPC. The learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate passed an order issuing the summons upon the petitioners and non-bail able warrants were also issued against petitioners Nos. 2 to 6 being the dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eme Court that if the Tribunal has set aside the order of con cealment and penalties there is no concealment in the eyes of law and, therefore, the prosecution could not be proceeded with by the complainant and further proceedings will be illegal and without jurisdiction. He has also relied upon the further observation of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision to the effect that as there was absence of dishonest and fraudulent intention, the question of committing the offence under section 420 of the IPC does not arise. It is further submitted that as observed by the hon'ble Supreme Court when the matter has been adjudicated and settled by the Tribunal need not be dragged into the criminal courts unless and until the act of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
