9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (9) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), and the petitioners were summoned to stand their trial. According to the petition of complaint lodged by one Lekha Shrivastava, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Patna, the petitioners herein had, inter alia, disclosed a sum of Rs. 52,000 in their returns, but had refused to disclose the source of income. Therefore, penalty proceedings were initiated against them under section 271(1)(c) of the Act and a penalty of Rs. 14,367 was imposed on them. The same was reduced to Rs. 2,701 by the appellate authority, and was affirmed by the Tribunal by its order dated December 20, 1989. On these allegations, the aforesaid petition of complaint dated January 7, 1991, was filed before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned counsel is right in his submission that there is no allegation against them in the petition of complaint that any income was sought to be held back or was not disclosed in the returns. On the contrary, it is a prosecution for refusal to disclose the source of income. It is manifest from a plain reading of the aforesaid provisions that prosecution can lie only if a person wilfully attempts in any manner whatsoever to evade any tax, penalty or interest chargeable or imposable under this Act. In the present case, there is no allegation that the petitioners failed to disclose any taxable income which could have resulted in evasion of any tax, penalty or interest chargeable or imposable under this Act. It follows as a matter of necessary im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the findings of the assessing authority which is the basis for the prosecution, having been set aside by the superior court at a later stage, results in setting aside the resultant prosecution. This was followed by the Supreme Court in a recent judgment reported in G. L. Didwania v. ITO [1997] 224 ITR 687. I am also reminded of the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Nawabkhan Abbaskhan v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1974 SC 1471, wherein it has been held that the basis for prosecution having been set aside at a later date by a superior court, results in setting aside of the same from the date of its nativity. Therefore, the resultant criminal proceedings based on the said order becomes unsustainable in law. When the substratum is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
