Back
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
Aditya Institute of Technology and Management – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J.
1. The instant petitions under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, [for short ‘Cr.P.C’] have been filed by the Petitioners/Accused Nos.,1 to 3, seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C. Nos.31, 32 and 33 of 2018 respectively on the file of the Court of IV Additional District Judge-cum-Special Economic Offences Court, Visakhapatnam for the offence under Section 276-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [for short ‘I.T.Act’].
2. Since the parties in the above three petitions are one and the same, all these petitions are decided by way of common order.
3. The facts leading to the filing of these Petitions are:
Prosecution under Section 276B of the Income Tax Act requires proof of failure to remit TDS without reasonable cause, which the petitioners successfully established.
Prosecution for delayed TDS deposits under Income Tax Act may be quashed when reasonable causes are established; the recent CBDT circular allows for compounding such offences.
Prosecution for delayed TDS deposits during COVID-19 was deemed unwarranted as the pandemic constituted a 'reasonable cause' for non-compliance.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the timing of TDS payment, the liability of the petitioners under Sections 276(B) and 278(B) of the Income Tax Act, and the interpretation of ....
There shall not be any penalty leviable under Section 271C of Income Tax Act, 1961 on mere delay in remittance of TDS after deducting the same by concerned assessee.
The prosecution for delays in depositing TDS cannot proceed when the amounts were eventually paid with interest, and valid explanations for the delays were provided.
The determination of wilfulness in filing returns and paying taxes under the Income Tax Act, 1961 is a matter of fact to be adjudicated during trial, and the statutory presumption of culpable mental ....
The main legal point established is that the failure to remit tax, without evidence of a wilful attempt to evade tax, does not constitute an offence under Section 276 C (2) of the Income Tax Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
