Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANAND SHARMA
Nagendra Choudhary S/o Shri Devendra Singh Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through Special P.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. foundation of the petition (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments for and against the petition (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis and reasoning (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 4. legal principles governing quashing (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 5. conclusion and order (Para 36 , 37) |
JUDGMENT :
ANAND SHARMA, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as 'Cr.P.C.'), seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from Criminal Case No. 140/2017 pending before the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter to be referred as 'the trial court') for alleged offence under Section 276C(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act of 1961').
2. It is stated in the petition that a search under Section 132 (1) of the Act of 1961 was carried out on 04.09.2013 at the petitioner’s residential and business premises, leading to the seizure of documents/ diaries indicating entries of unaccounted advances of Rs. 1,47,00,000/-. The petitioner
An annulled penalty under the Income Tax Act negates the foundation for criminal prosecution for concealment unless reversed, thus quashing ongoing prosecution.
The court established that there was no power vested with the Income Tax Department to launch a prosecution for undisclosed income for the block assessment period between 1.7.1995 to 1.1.1997, as per....
The court established that an assessing officer's satisfaction of concealment of income during assessment suffices to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c), irrespective of whether spe....
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.
Criminal prosecution requires credible evidence; unauthenticated foreign documents are insufficient to establish a prima facie case of tax evasion under the Income Tax Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that willful concealment of income and failure to file income tax returns within the stipulated time constitute an offence under Section 276CC of t....
(1) Wilful tax evasion – Mens rea of assessee is required to be proved – In absence, lodging such prosecution would result into futility.(2) Wilful tax evasion – Circulars issued by Revenue are bindi....
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
