2002 (10) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d down. In such facts, the Supreme Court had quashed the proceedings initiated under the Income-tax Act against the assessee. In view of the said judgment, I find that the prosecution against the petitioner is an abuse of the process of law. The very basis of penalty has been struck down by the authorities under the Act. - Consequently, I allow the present petition, set aside the order of the sess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... de wrong claim of depreciation. However, the assessee surrendered the amount of depreciation on February 2, 1986, on the condition (no penalty or prosecution) which was accepted by the Department. But, subsequently, penalty proceedings under sections 276C, 277 read with section 278B of the Income-tax Act were initiated. Before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the petitioners moved an appli .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Jayappan v. S.K. Perumal, First ITO [1984] 149 ITR 696 (SC) and G.L. Didwania v. ITO [1997] 224 ITR 687 (SC) to contend that if the departmental proceedings have attained finality in favour of the assessee, then the very basis to prosecute the assessee is knocked down and, thus, prosecution of the petitioners is an abuse of the process of law. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X