Back
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN
Hemant Mahipatray Shah – Appellant
Versus
Anand Upadhyay – Respondent
ORDER:
Prithviraj K. Chavan, J.
1. Rule.
2. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
3. Learned Counsel for the respondents waives service.
4. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the petitions are taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission.
5. This bunch of petitions arose from identical set of facts questioning legality and propriety of prosecution of the petitioners by the respondent No.1.
6. The petitioners, have, therefore, invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr. P.C”) r/w Article 227 of the Constitution of India impugning issuance of process on the basis of the complaints filed by the Income Tax Officer under Section 279 (1) of the INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 (for short “I.T Act”) to prosecute them for the offence punishable under sections 276B r/w 278B of the I.T. Act. Briefly stated, facts are as follows.
7. Respondent No.1 - Income Tax officer has filed complaints under Section 279 (1) of the I.T Act along with sanction to prosecute the petitioners for the offences as referred hereinabove. The complainants alleged that M/s. Hubtown Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “assessee” ) is a Comp
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.
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 ....
Non-compliance with mandatory statutory requirements, such as serving notice under section 2(35)(b) of the Income Tax Act, can invalidate a prosecution.
An annulled penalty under the Income Tax Act negates the foundation for criminal prosecution for concealment unless reversed, thus quashing ongoing prosecution.
object of launching criminal prosecution for wilful default in complying with the provisions of the Income Tax Act is to prevent evasion of tax
Prosecution for delayed TDS deposits during COVID-19 was deemed unwarranted as the pandemic constituted a 'reasonable cause' for non-compliance.
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
