9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 901X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... age, not required to go into the question and answer whether or not the petitioner has committed any offence and therefore should or should not be prosecuted. As per the respondents, the issue relates to foreign bank accounts and whether income or amounts mentioned therein represent undisclosed income, etc. These are matters for the authorities to decide on the basis of documents available. The sanctioning authority would also decide whether or not to grant sanction. List of witness and documents would be examined keeping in view allegations made in the written complaint. In case cognizance and summoning order is passed, the person aggrieved can challenge the summoning/cognizance order in accordance with law. A pre-emptory order at this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e proceedings arising out of the said show cause notice and grant an opportunity to the Petitioner to file an effective final reply to the show cause notice, after supply of all material and documents in the possession of the respondents, and further directing the Respondents to consider the reply on merits; and (d) Direct the respondents not to initiate any prosecution proceedings against the petitioner prior to finalizing the assessment proceedings and fulfilling the pre-conditions, mandatory under Section 276 of the Income Tax Act, including the computation of the tax liability, necessary for launching a prosecution. (e) And any other order(s) may kindly be passed, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 27th April, 2017, were furnished. 6. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the letter dated 16th June, 2017, refers to documents received by the petitioner on 21st March, 2017 and 1st June, 2017, but in fact no documents were furnished on the said dates to the petitioner. It is also pointed out that this letter dated 16th June, 2017 refers to the show cause notice dated 28th March, 2017, whereas the show cause notice issued to the petitioner is dated 9th June, 2017. Counsel for the respondent-Revenue has stated that this is factually correct. Reference to the documents received on 21st March, 2017 and 1st June, 2017 is with reference to identical documents, which were furnished to the parents of the petitioner, namely, Poon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as launched. Rejecting the said contention, the Supreme Court, held that there was no such provision or requirement in the Act and there was no warrant for interfering on account of earlier failure to issue show cause notice or opportunity to compound the matter. 9. We are, at this stage, not required to go into the question and answer whether or not the petitioner has committed any offence and therefore should or should not be prosecuted. As per the respondents, the issue relates to foreign bank accounts and whether income or amounts mentioned therein represent undisclosed income, etc. These are matters for the authorities to decide on the basis of documents available. The sanctioning authority would also decide whether or not to grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
