9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 29,36,625/- and the receipt for payment of the said amount has been annexed in the typed set filed along with this petition - respondent, without taking note of the payment of the above said amount and pendency of the appeal proceedings before this High Court, has erroneously launched criminal prosecution against the petitioner for wilful commission of concealment of income to avoid payment of tax, under Section 276(c)(1) As pointed out that the petitioner has paid the penalty amount, immediately after receipt of the show cause notice, as early as on 27.07.2017, however, the complaint has been preferred at a much later point of time during October 2017 and further there is no allegation whatsoever to prove that the petitioner has wilfu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment order was passed on 31.12.2008 and demand for payment of tax was made to the tune of ₹ 39,05,711/-. Since the petitioner has not paid the said demanded amount, the penalty proceedings were initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the said Act. After conclusion of the penalty proceedings, the demand notice was issued under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 29.06.2009 and directed the petitioner to pay the amount of ₹ 29,36,625/- within a period of 30 days from the date of service of the notice. Challenging the said Demand Notice dated 29.06.2009, the petitioner Company had preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the said appeal was dismissed by an order dated 16.03.2015. Challenging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the show cause notice dated 27.06.2017. Further in order to comply with the statutory requirement, the petitioner has sent a reply dated 27.06.2017, mentioning about the pendency of the above said case and also agreed to pay the demanded amount and paid the penalty amount of ₹ 29,36,625/-. Such being the case, even though the petitioner Company has paid the penalty amount as early as 27.07.2017, the complaint has been preferred by the respondent herein before the Trial Court in E.O.C.C.Nos.613 and 614 of 2017, at a later point of time during October 2017, without taking into consideration the fact of payment of penalty, for the reasons best known to them and hence the complaint preferred after payment of the penalty amount, by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 39,05,711/-. For the alleged wilful attempt for evasion of tax, the respondent has also initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(C) of the Income Tax Act. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has also preferred series of litigations before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, whereby the petitions filed by the petitioner were dismissed. Challenging the dismissal order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the appeal in T.C.A.No.876 of 2016, is also pending before this Court. During the pendency of the appeal, the respondent has issued show cause Notice dated 27.06.2017. For which, the petitioner has also sent his reply on the same day and agreed to pay the penalty amount and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
