B.N.Agrawal, J.

1. This application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners for setting aside the impugned order dated June 15, 1986, passed in trial No. 6 of 1986, before the Presiding Officer, Special Court, for trial of cases relating to economic offences (hereinafter referred to as the "Special Court") by which he has refused to discharge the petitioners from the charge under Sec. 276B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), as well as for quashing of the prosecution of the petitioners in the aforesaid case.

2. Necessary facts giving rise to criminal prosecution of the petitioners are that petitioner No. 1 is a partnership firm registered as such under the Act and petitioners Nos. 2 to 5 are its partners. In the course of the assessment proceeding for the assessment year 1977-78, it transpired that the accused persons did not deduct income-tax under Sec. 194A of the Act in time and the same resulted in non-payment of tax within the prescribed time to the credit of the Central Government. The amount of interest payable to seven different persons by the petitioner-firm (hereinafter referred to as "the assessee") was credited to their respective accounts on March 29, 1977, but the income-tax thereon was deducted only on July 29, 1977, and the same was paid to the credit of the Central Government on August 1, 1977, whereby two months default was committed by the asses-see in payment of the income-tax deducted or to be deducted at source (hereinafter referred to as the T. D. S.).

3. Penalty proceedings were initiated under Sec. 201 read with Sec. 221 of the Act against the assessee in which notice was purported to have been served upon it and the Income-tax Officer imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,418 besides interest amounting to Rs. 113, total being Rs. 1,531. The assessee having learnt about the imposition of penalty preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax who reduced the penalty to Rs. 500 by his order dated December 14, 1982. Being dissatisfied with the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the asses-see preferred a revision before the Commissioner of Income-tax, Patna, under Sec. 264 of the Act. During the pendency of the said revision application on March 30, 1984, a complaint petition was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, by the Income-tax Officer at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax for prosecution of the petitioners under Sec. 276B of the Act stating therein the aforesaid facts who, by his order passed on the same day, took cognisance of the aforesaid offence and summoned the petitioners to face trial which was to be held by a Magistrate to whom the case was transferred by the very same order. Later on, after the constitution of the Special Court, the case was transferred to it.

4. In the criminal trial, in the year 1985, three witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant and cross-examined before the framing of the charge. Thereafter, on January 17, 1986, on behalf of the petitioners, a petition for discharge was filed on grounds, inter alia, that the revision application arising out of the penalty proceeding was pending before the Commissioner of Income-tax. Subsequently, on February 13, 1986, the Commissioner of Income-tax allowed the revision application and deleted the penalty in its entirety on merits. In the revisional order, it has been stated that the explanation of the assessee for not deducting and paying the T.D.S. within time to the credit of the Central Government was that the assessee could not receive the arhatias (commission agents) account in time and the munim (accountant) of the assessee was lying ill as a result of which delay was caused in finalisation of the accounts. The Commissioner of Income-tax having been satisfied that the assessee had proved to his satisfaction that the default was for good and sufficient reasons deleted the penalty and the order reads thus :

"1. Th