9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atter - HELD That:- Once the sanction order has been quashed by this Court in a writ petition filed by the petitioner, the criminal compliant filed against him on the basis of the sanction order dated 21.3.2006 does not survive. It is also important to note here that the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) issued a circular dated 7.2.1991 and it has directed that no prosecution is to be initiated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) for alleged willful concealment of income and evasion of tax. The assessment of the income of the petitioner was computed under Section 143(C) of the Act on 9.1.2001 for the Assessment Year 1998-1999 determining the total income at ₹ 4,82,440/-. The assessing officer imposed the penalty of ₹ 91,000/- against the petitioner under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The petitioner chal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er on 21.3.2006 under Section 279 (1) of the Act granting sanction for filing criminal complaint against the petitioner under Section 276-C(1) read with Section 277 of the Act for the alleged willful concealment of income and attempt to evade tax. The petitioner had challenged the aforesaid sanction order dated 21.3.2006 in Writ Petition No.2838 (MB) of 2007. This Court has allowed the writ petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/-, which is much below of ₹ 25,000/-. Considering the fact that the sanction order dated 21.3.2006 has already been quashed by this Court and the penalty which has been imposed upon the petitioner, is less than ₹ 25,000/-, the criminal complaint filed against the petitioner deserves to be quashed. The petition, thus, is allowed and the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
