9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (8) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led the return of income of the assessee-firm for the assessment year 1973-74, on September 14, 1973, and declared an income of Rs. 33,810. The Income-tax Officer, after discussing the case with the petitioner, framed an agreed assessment accepting the net income of the petitioner as Rs. 36,000. The business premises of the petitioner were searched under section 132(1) of the Act, on June 22, 1976, and certain account books and documents were seized. The petitioner filed a revised return for the assessment year 1973-74, on July 1, 1981. It showed a difference of assets over liabilities of Rs. 39,373. The petitioner received a notice under section 148 of the Act on September 21, 1981, for reopening the petitioner's assessment. The petition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 82. It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioner had already moved an application under section 245C of the Act before the Settlement Commission for settlement of his case on November 17, 1981/November 23, 1981, and this petition has been admitted and is pending consideration before the Settlement Commission. It is pleaded that the matter involved in the complaint and in the settlement petition pending before the Settlement Commission is the same and if the Settlement Commission decides the matter in favour of the petitioner, the proceedings taken on the basis of the complaint would become redundant. The learned Magistrate is continuing with the trial of the case and the petitioner's prayer for the adjournment of the case sine d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o on with the trial of the complaint during the pendency of the proceedings before the Settlement Commission ; and (iii) that criminal proceedings under sections 277 and 279 of the Act cannot be sanctioned and initiated before the conclusion of penalty proceedings. These arguments have not impressed me. The Final Court had upheld the vires of section 52 of the Act of 1922 in T. S. Baliah v. T. S. Rangachari, ITO [1969] 72 ITR 787 (SC). The provisions of section 52 of the 1922 Act are analogus to the provisions of sections 277 and 279 of the 1961 Act. The ratio of that decision equally applies to the present case and for the reasons given in that judgment, sections 277 and 279 of the Act cannot be held to be unconstitutional. Chapter X ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
