9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (1) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t cases that the present criminal miscellaneous cases have been filed. The aforesaid complaint petitions against the present petitioner have been registered as Complaint Case No. 88(C) of 2002, Complaint Case No. 89(C) of 2002, Complaint Case No. 90(C) of 2002, Complaint Case No. 91(C) of 2002 and Complaint Case No. 92(C) of 2002. In the present petitions the petitioner has prayed that this criminal prosecution in the aforesaid cases and the entire proceeding against him including the order taking cognizance of the offence under the provisions of section 276C of the Act be quashed. Along with this for the present, he has prayed that the aforesaid criminal proceedings against him be stayed. In this order I will take up for consideration only his prayer for the stay of the aforesaid criminal proceedings against him. I will refer to the facts as disclosed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 29834 of 2002 at present. Similar facts have been alleged in other criminal miscellaneous cases mentioned above. It appears that opposite party No. 2 had filed different complaint petitions in the court of the Special Judge, Economic Offences, Patna, making various allegations against the present petit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t-finding authority under the provisions of this Act. Further, the petitioner has contended that he has also filed an appeal against the order imposing penalty under the provisions of section 271(1)(b) of the Act. Relying on the case of CIT v. Bhupen Champak Lal Dalal [2001] 248 ITR 830 (SC), the petitioner has contended that during the pendency of this appeal before the Tribunal criminal cases pending before the competent court against the petitioner have to be stayed. Also he has placed reliance on the case of Banwarilal Satyanarain v. State of Bihar [1989] 179 ITR 387 (Patna). Under the aforesaid circumstances, he has prayed that during the pendency of these applications further proceedings against him in different complaint cases mentioned above pending before the court of the Special Judge, Economic Offences, Patna, be stayed. From annexure 5, it would appear that for the various assessment years appeals were filed before the Appellate Tribunal, Patna, on May 19, 2000, and these appeals are still pending. From annexure 6, it would appear that against the order imposing penalty under the provisions of section 271(1)(b) of the Act appeals were filed before the Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interim order of stay by which he allowed the work of recording of evidence to proceed but stayed the passing of the order about framing of the charge or discharge of the accused or his acquittal during pendency of the appeals filed by the accused before the income-tax appellate authorities. Against this order a revision was filed before the learned sessions judge who dismissed the same. Thereupon, the matter was taken to the High Court, Mumbai, which by entertaining a writ petition and noticing several decisions of the said court as also of the Supreme Court issued rule in the matter and granted an interim order staying the proceedings in the criminal cases filed before the learned Magistrate. Against this order special leave petitions were filed before the Supreme Court and the decision as cited above was passed. The Supreme Court has observed as follows : "The prosecution in criminal law and proceedings arising under the Act are undoubtedly independent proceedings and, therefore, there is no impediment in law for the criminal proceedings to proceed even during the pendency of the proceedings under the Act. However, a wholesome rule will have to be adopted in matters of this na ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was made to quash the entire proceeding, it will be all the more necessary to stay the criminal proceeding i-, hen the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings has been made. He has pointed out that if the entire proceedings are quashed there would be no question of the prosecution of the petitioner. Hence, when the stay can be granted in a case in which no claim for quashing of the proceeding was made there would be no difficulty in granting of the stay in a case in which the claim for quashing the proceeding has been made since if the proceedings are quashed there would be no question of any interim stay and nothing would be left to prosecute the assessee. I find force in this contention. In this connection my attention has also been drawn to section 279(1) of the Act, according to which a person shall not be proceeded against for an offence under section 276C or section 277 of the Act except with the previous sanction of the Commissioner or Commissioner (Appeals) or the appropriate authority provided that the Chief Commissioner or the Director General may, issue such instructions or directions to the aforesaid income-tax authorities as he may deem fit for institution of pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
