9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (10) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er sections 193 and 420 read with section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 276C(1) and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). This prosecution relates to the assessment year 1982-83. In C. C. No. 153 of 1984, on the file of the same Magistrate, the petitioner is being prosecuted for the alleged commission of offences punishable under sections 193 and 177 read with section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and section 276C(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This prosecution relates to the assessment year 1983-84. In C. C. No. 153 of 1984, the petitioner had not filed her return of income but her representative, P. C. Krishnan, had handed over to the respondent signed a typewritten statement giving detail ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner in each one of these petitions, contended that the complaints laid by the Income-tax Department were premature. He specifically argued that offences will be non-existent before the assessment was completed and, therefore, there was a total prohibition at the threshold to initiate these prosecutions, He also contended that notice before initiation of prosecution was mandatory. He would also submit that initiation of prosecutions at this stage was against the principles of natural justice. The next contention was that sanction to prosecute was not in accordance with law. Finally, he contended that section 276C was not constitutionally valid since there was no rational classification. Lack of such classification contravenes the equality gu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 276C(1) of the Act apparently contemplates initiation of prosecution against a person for wilfully attempting in any manner whatsoever to evade tax, penalty or interest, irrespective of and without prejudice to penalty proceedings under the other provisions of the Act. Once a return had been submitted or statement had been made in any verification, if those statements were false, the provisions of section 277 will be attracted and prosecution will be feasible. None of these sections contemplate any show-cause notice being issued before initiation of prosecution. I am unable to agree that the offences under sections 276C(1) and 277 of the Act will be non-existent unless and until the assessment is contemplated. As long as there is no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... criminal court, for the criminal court has to independently judge the case on the evidence placed before it. The argument, on the invalidity of sanction, has no merit. Section 279 of the Act, as it stood at the relevant time, contemplated initiation of prosecution at the instance of the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner. Nowhere did that section prescribe that sanction was a pre-requisite for initiation of prosecution. This ground will have to be rejected in limine. The argument on constitutional validity of section 276C(1), to my mind, has to be stated only to be rejected. The basis of the argument was that section 276C(1) provided for a minimum imprisonment of six months. Under clause (2), the minimum sentence prescribed was only three ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
