9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (3) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT J.- Prosecution was launched against the appellants for alleged concealment of income and thereby wilfully attempting to evade tax, and for making false statement in the verification in terms of section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the" Act"), relating to the assessment year 1988-89. Cognizance was taken by the Special Court, Economic Offences, Muzaffarpur, Bihar, in Complaint Case No. 50 of 1992 instituted by the income-tax authorities. Petitions under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short "the Code"), were filed by appellant No.1 (hereinafter referred to as "the firm") and L.N. Poddar, a partner of the assessee-firm before the Patna High Court. The specific stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 245C has co-operated with the Settlement Commission in the proceedings before it and has made a full and true disclosure of his income and the manner in which such income has been derived, grant to such person, subject to such conditions as it may think fit to impose, immunity from prosecution for any offence under this Act or under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or under any other Central Act for the time being in force and also (either wholly or in part) from the imposition of any penalty under this Act, with respect to the case covered by the settlement: Provided that no such immunity shall be granted by the Settlement Commission in cases where the proceedings for the prosecution for any such offence have been instituted before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 245C of the Act deals with application of settlement of cases. As noted above no immunity can be granted by the Commission in cases where the proceedings for prosecution under the Act or under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short "the IPC") or under any Central Act for the time being in force have been instituted before the date of receipt of application under section 245C after June 1, 1987. There is logic in the prohibition. It is intended to discourage filing of belated applications after prosecution is launched and also reasons envisaged in CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee [1979] 118 ITR 461 (SC), wherein it was observed that section 245H is a magnet which attracts large tax-dodgers, and it was emphasised that the power of immunisation ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The above being the position, the proceedings before the special court are quashed. However, at this stage, the apprehension of Mr. Agrawal, learned senior counsel for respondent No.1 about consequences flowing from non-compliance with the Commission's order needs to be taken note of. Sub section (1A) of section 245H deals with the consequences of non-compliance with the orders and sufficiently takes care of such apprehensions. In case, there is non-compliance with the Commission's order, the provisions of subsection (1A) of section 245H shall be operative and the appellants are rendered liable, notwithstanding the earlier immunity granted as if such immunity was not granted at all. It shall be open to the income-tax authorities to ask f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
