SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1988 Supreme(Raj) 777

MOHINI KAPUR
Hakam Chand And 6 Others – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Ravi Kasliwal, Advocate.
For the Income Tax Department :Amar Singh Chaudhary, Advocate.

JUDGMENT

1. -Complaints under Sections 276B and 278 of the Income Tax Act have been filed against the accused petitioners by the Income Tax Officer before the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Jaipur. Upon these complaints the Chief Judicial Magistrate has ordered the issue of non-bailable warrants for the arrest of these petitioners. The case of the department appears to be that the company M/s. Bedla Flour Mills and Allied Industries Private Limited failed to deduct tax at source on the interest paid by it to the Directors. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioners that what ever tax was due has been deposited before the presentation of the complaints, though in some cases the delay in deposit was from 4 to 16 months. The learned Sessions Judge while dealing with the bail applications observed that the tax had been deposited in 7 cases only but by showing challans the petitioners have been able to make out a prima facie case that tax has been deposited in the 10 cases prior to the institution of the complaints.

2. The department wants to show that this is not a case of simple delay in the deposit of tax but actually this is a case where the tax wa








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top