9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (6) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Rathnam Food Stuff Company, Tuticorin, filed an income-tax return dated January 20, 1978, for the accounting year ending April 30, 1977 (assessment year 1977-78), admitting an income of Rs. 13,380. The return was accompanied by profit and loss account, the trial balance, income-tax adjustment and copy of the capital account of the petitioner and the return was accepted. On August 20,1981, and August 21, 1981, a search was conducted at the residence of the petitioner under s. 132 of the I. T. Act which resulted in the seizure of several documents and account books which revealed the suppression of purchase of chicory seeds, the existence of several bank accounts, fixed deposits, investments in the names of his wife and daughters and sever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him under cl. (iii) of sub-s. (1) of s. 271 has been reduced or waived by an order under s. 273A of the Act and that the petitioner is also entitled to compound the offence with the Commissioner and, hence, the launching of the prosecution before the completion of the assessment takes away the valuable benefits that may accrue to the petitioner in the assessment proceedings. According to the petitioner, therefore, the respondent ought to have waited till the completion of the assessment proceedings before filing the criminal prosecution. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent there is no provision of law which prohibits the respondent-Department from launching criminal prosecution for offences under ss. 276C and 277 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the High Court pointed out that if the expectations of the assessee fructify and an order was passed in its favour by the time the trial was pending, or even at the appellate and revisional stages, all these courts, in dealing with that matter, would be required to give due regard to these findings in case they were favourable to the assessee, and therefore, the proceedings against the assessee at the initial stage were not an abuse of the process of the court and the grant of stay of the proceedings would not be in the interest of justice. I respectfully agree with the view expressed by the learned judge. The decision of the Supreme Court in Uttam Chand v. ITO [1982] 133 ITR 909, does not at all support the contention of the learned co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
