9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (4) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... November 16, 1981, to December 27, 1982, there were entries in the diary showing payments in cash to different parties on different dates but there were no corresponding entries in the regular books of account maintained by the firm. The total of these payments made by the firm to different persons worked out to Rs. 87,124.80. Similarly, there were several entries in the diary showing the receipts of payments from different parties but no corresponding entries were there in the cash book and ledger. The total payments so received and not accounted for in the regular books of account (cash book and ledger) worked out to Rs. 31, 163. The Income-tax Department also compared the entries in the ledger and cash book maintained by the firm with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Jullundur, by the Income-tax Officer of the relevant circle contending that there was a clear-cut attempt on the part of the accused firm to evade payment of income-tax besides preparing false and forged accounts. The assessment for the relevant period was also completed by the concerned Income-tax Officer on March 30, 1985, that is, much before the filing of the criminal complaint and an ad hoc addition to the tune of Rs. 10,000 was made. The impugned order, annexure P-2, was passed by the Income-tax Officer in the absence of the accused firm because it failed to turn up on that day. Shri Beant Singh Bedi, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jullundur, vide his order dated March 19, 1987, after recording evidence of the complainant and discussin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rn filed by the Income-tax Officer, the above referred to allegations in the complaint were reagitated besides maintaining that there was no legal bar in launching criminal prosecution under sections 276C and 277 of the Act while the assessment or reassessment proceedings were still pending before the authorities concerned. I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides perusing the record. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent has also produced the assessment order dated January 8, 1988, of the Income-tax Officer, Jullundur, in order to show that after hearing the accused firm, the earlier assessment of the Income-tax Officer was confirmed. There is no dispute regarding the legal position that if the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
