9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aint filed by the respondent under section 276C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the petition are that the respondent filed a complaint under section 276C of the Income-tax Act against the petitioner on the allegations that the petitioner-company had filed false return of its income for the assessment year 1985-86 and had concealed considerable income which o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioner-company. For furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, penalty proceedings were initiated against the petitioner-company and a penalty of Rs. 98,694 was imposed upon the company. By the order dated November 9, 1999, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) set aside the said order of the Assessing Officer imposing penalty of Rs. 98,694 holding that the petitioner-company had not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 98,694 has been set aside for want of evidence to prove that the petitioner-company had filed inaccurate particulars of income in respect of the assessment year 1985-86. There is nothing on the record to show or suggest that the respondent has taken any appropriate proceedings to have the aforesaid order set aside in accordance with law. That being so, the said order of the Commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the very basis of the complaint does not exist and the petitioner's prosecution on the same set of facts and evidence cannot be sustained (P. S. Rajya v. State of Bihar [1996] SCC (Crl.) 897 ; Ramesh Kumar v. State [1985] Crl. LJ 681 ; Uttam Chand v. ITO [1982] 133 ITR 909 (SC); S. K. Sinha v. S. K. Singhal [1987] 1 Crimes 842 (Delhi); Jewels of Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
