9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (1) TMI 73X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the directors of the said company and accused No. 10 is an employee of that company. Accused No. 1 is engaged in the manufacture of various electric items. For the assessment year 1981-82, the accused company filed its return of income on June 29, 1981, in the prescribed form and verified under the signature of accused No. 7. The return was accompanied by printed audited balance-sheet, profit and loss account and other details which were signed by accused Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 in their capacity as directors. The matter regarding the assessment of income was pending and a notice was issued on July 8, 1983, to the accused calling for further information in detail but, in the meanwhile, the Central Excise authorities searched the premises o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rged. Six accused, who are the directors of the said company, have filed Criminal Miscellaneous (M) No. 764 of 1985 praying for the same relief. Shri P. D. Pasari, accused No. 8, one of the directors, also filed separate Criminal Miscellaneous (M) No. 594 of 1985 seeking the same relief. The accused have filed Criminal Revision No. 162 of 1986 praying that the order passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate refusing to stay/adjourn/postpone the proceedings till the reassessment proceedings are completed by the income-tax authorities be set aside and proceedings be also quashed and the accused be discharged or in the alternative, it be directed that trial shall stand stayed till the reassessment proceedings are completed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the respondents have argued that the averments made in the complaint show that the accused have tried to evade the duty by not accounting for the goods taken out from their factory in their account books and thus the ingredients of the offence covered by section 276C(1) of the Act are prima facie made out and the result of the reassessment proceedings may or may not have any effect on the criminal trial and it would not be in the interests of justice to stay the criminal trial till the reassessment proceedings are completed. He has placed reliance on P. Jayappan v. S. K. Perumal [1984] 149 ITR 696 (SC). It has been held in this judgment by the Supreme Court that the pendency of the reassessment proceedings could not act as a bar to the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... take into consideration also the order to be passed therein. It was further observed that there is no rigid rule which makes it necessary for a criminal court to adjourn or postpone the hearing of a case before it indefinitely or for an unduly long period only because some proceeding which may have some bearing on it is pending elsewhere. The above observations of the Supreme Court clearly apply to the facts of the present case. The trial in the criminal cases should take priority and it is always desirable that evidence which the prosecution has to lead in support of the complaint should be led as early as possible so that the evidence is not lost with the passage of time. The interests of justice required that the criminal trial should p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
