9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (1) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty having been afforded to them of being heard before launching the prosecution. While assailing the acquittal of the respondents as recorded by the learned magistrate, it has been contended on behalf of the appellant that there is no provision in the Income-tax Act for the issuance of a showcause notice to the respondents before launching the prosecution. The question of principles of natural justice does not arise. That the learned magistrate has failed to appreciate the evidence coming on record in the right perspective, while ordering the acquittal of the respondents. The offences stood proved and established on the record against all the respondents beyond any reasonable doubt. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation, it is all the more essential that the persons sought to be prosecuted, should be afforded an opportunity of hearing before the launching of the prosecution. The learned judge accordingly quashed the prosecution of the petitioners therein, since no show-cause notice was issued to them before launching the prosecution. The above view of the Rajasthan High Court was approved and followed by a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in P. V. Pai v. R. L. Rinawma, Deputy CIT [1993] 200 ITR 717. It was held : "If the provisions of section 279 of the Act are read in totality together with the provisions of section 278 regarding abetment of assessee or a person abetting the commission of the offence under section 276C, the intention o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... excluded, the requirement of natural justice will be implied in all situations where the order made would have adverse civil consequences for the parties affected. It was further held that the requirement of natural justice is inherent in the provisions of section 279(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and that the person accused is entitled to notice before the initiation of proceedings in respect of which a right of compounding has been given under section 279(2) of the Act. The contrary view has been taken by the Madras High Court in Dr. Mrs. M. S. Dhowani v. J. Ranganathan, Second ITO [1992] 194 ITR 690, and by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Laxmandas Pranchand v. Union of India [1998] 234 ITR 261. It has been held that sections 276C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of Chapter XX-C. There is nothing in the language of section 269UD or any other provision in the said Chapter which would negate such an opportunity being given." In other words, unless expressly excluded, the requirement of natural justice will be implied in all situations where the order made would have adverse civil consequences for the parties affected. The approach of the High Courts of Madras and Madhya Pradesh that no notice was required before launching the prosecution in the absence of provision of natural justice, in view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in C. B. Gautam v. Union of India [1993] 199 ITR 530, therefore, does not appear to be correct. The approach should rather be whether the provisions of natu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
