9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (1) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated, the facts are that the appellant filed a complaint against M/s. Kamra Trading Co., Abohar, through its partners, namely, Dewan Chand Kamra, Smt. Sangeeta Kamra, Smt. Parkash Wati (now dead) and Smt. Har Devi (now dead) under sections 276C, 277 read with section 278B of the Act for the assessment year 1986-87. It was averred that Dewan Chand Kamra to the extent of 30 per cent., Smt. Sangeeta Kamra and Smt. Parkash Wati to the extent of 25 per cent. each and Smt. Har Devi to the extent of 20 per cent. were the partners of M/s. Kamra Trading Co., Abohar, which is a registered firm. It was further alleged that the said firm filed a return along with annexures, declaring the income of Rs. 1,28,050 on August 12,1986, and the verification was signed by Dewan Chand Kamra. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Income-tax Officer collected information regarding purchase of demand drafts by M/s. Kamra Trading Co. from the Central Bank of India, Abohar, in the name of self and its supplier (for payment to them) without entering the same in its account books, which are detailed as under: -------------------------------------------------------- Sl. Date of D.D.No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ufficient grounds for proceedings against the respondents, summoned them under sections 276C, 277 read with section 278B of the Act. During the pendency of the proceedings in the trial court, Smt. Har Devi and Smt. Parkash Wati died and as such, their names were struck off from the array of the respondents. The appellants examined six witnesses in pre-charge evidence. After the conclusion of pre-charge evidence and hearing counsel for the parties, the respondents were charged under sections 276C and 277 read with section 278B of the Act vide order dated November 22, 1994, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After framing of the charge, the witnesses examined in pre-charge evidence, were produced and further cross-examined by the respondents. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the respondents were recorded under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, wherein they denied the allegations of the complainant and pleaded false implication. Dewan Chand, the respondent, further stated that he had preferred an appeal before the Tribunal against the orders dated December 30,1987, and March 7,1988, and both the orders had been set aside ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... working of the company. She had not signed the return filed for the assessment year 1986-87. There is no evidence on the file that she had ever signed any document relating to the business of the company. Dewan Chand Kamra had admitted in his statement, exhibit PK, regarding the purchase of drafts. Otherwise also, the purchase of drafts is proved from the statement of PW-1 R.N. Swami, branch manager. He produced vouchers exhibits PA to PF and stated that through these vouchers, M/s. Kamra Trading Co., Abohar, had purchased demand drafts of Rs. 50,000 on March 15,1986 bearing No. 941685, on March 22,1986, another draft bearing No. 941764 of Rs. 15,000 and on March 25,1986 three drafts bearing Nos. 941802 to 941804 amounting to Rs. 20,000 each and another draft bearing No. 941805 dated March 25,1986 of Rs. 50,000. He further stated that all the vouchers, exhibits PA to PF contained the signatures of Dewan Chand, the respondent, and the said drafts were issued by Sh. M.L. Nagpal and Sh. K.L. Grover. He further stated that vouchers, exhibits PA and PB contained the signatures of Mohan Lal Nagpal and vouchers exhibits PC to PF contained the signatures of Sh. K.L. Grover. He further sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relating to the prosecution of persons above a certain age could not override the specific provisions of the Act. Thus, he contended that the acquittal of Dewan Chand, the respondent, on the ground that he was aged more than 80 years, was not tenable as the guidelines could not override the statute, i.e., the specific provisions of the Act. For this contention, he has placed reliance upon an authority of the Madras High Court reported in Madura Chit and Investments (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1994] 208 ITR 228, which supported the above contention of learned counsel for the appellant. He further contended that if there was evasion of income-tax by a company, then the Act provided both substantive sentence as well as fine and since the company was a juristic person, it could not be made to undergo imprisonment and only punishment of fine could be awarded to the company. For this contention, he placed reliance upon an authority of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asst. Commissioner v. Velliappa Textiles Ltd. [2003] 263 ITR 550, which supported the above contention of learned counsel. It has been observed by the Hon'ble apex court in State of Haryana v. Brij Lal Mittal [1998] 93 Comp Cas 329 that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
