IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

DHARWAD BENCH

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF APRIL 2021

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ

CRL.P. NO.100390/2020

BETWEEN:

1 . MURALIDHAR SHRINIVAS KONDAGAL

AGE 54 YEARS, OCC. BUSINESS,

R/O R.NO.201, PLOT NO.12,

BASAVA NAGAR, TQ. GOKAK-591306

DIST. BELAGAVI.

2 . SURESH G. SHOLAPURMATH

AGE. 67 YEARS,

OCC. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT,

COURT ROAD, GOKAK,

DIST. BELAGAVI-591307

...PETITIONERS

(BY SRI. SHRIHARSH A NEELOPANT, ADV.)

AND

INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

REP. BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER,

SHRI.ANGAD KUMAR, AGE. 41 YEARS,

INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WARD-I, GOKAK-591307

…RESPONDENT

(BY SRI. Y.V.RAVIRAJ, ADV.)

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/SEC.482 OF

CR.P.C.,PRAYING TO QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT IN CC

NO.703/2015 AS PER ANNEXURE-A PENDING BEFORE THE

PRINCIPAL CJ AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS,

GOKAK FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION

276C AND 277 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, IN SO FAR AS

PETITIONERS CONCERNED.

2

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

The petitioners have preferred this petition

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the

proceedings

initiated

against

them

in

C.C.

No.703/2015, on the file of Court of Principal Civil

Judge and JMFC, Gokak, for offences punishable

under Sections 276C(2) and 277 of Income Tax

Act, 1961.

2.

Heard

the

learned

counsel

for

the

petitioners

and

learned

Standing

counsel

appearing for respondent/complainant.

3.

On the basis of a private complaint filed

by the respondent, the aforesaid proceedings were

initiated against the petitioners. The sum and

substance of the complaint averments are that

accused No.1 is an assessee under the Income Tax

Act. Accused No.2 is the Chartered Accountant

3

providing Professional services in the name and

style as ‘M/s. S.G. Sholapurmath and Company’ at

Gokak. Accused No.1 filed returns of income for

the assessment year 2008-09, prepared and filed

by accused No.2, wherein the tax liability payable

under Section 140(A) i.e., self assessment tax has

been worked out and the tax due was claimed to

have been paid on the date specified in each case.

Further, counter file of the income tax challan duly

stamped by the SBI, Gokak was filed with returns

in

support

of

payment

of

the

tax.

While

processing the returns of the income on AST, it

was found that the self assessment tax has been

paid at a lesser amount than actually shown in the

counter file of the income tax challan enclosed

along with returns and extra digit was prefixed to

the amount actually paid. Thus, showing the

higher figure. It is alleged that the challan was

materially altered after payment to show excess

4

payment/credit/claim of Rs.1,000/- by accused

No.1 in the returns filed by him.

4.

It is alleged by the complainant that

accused Nos.1 and 2 have colluded with each other

in the fraudulent claim by paying less tax but

claiming as if they have made higher payment of

tax thereby evaded the payment of tax and

therefore, liable for prosecution under Section

276C(2) of I.T. Act, 1961.

5.

The learned counsel for the petitioners

would

contend

that

as

per

circular

F.No.285/160/90/IT(INV)/190

dated

07.02.1991

issued by Government of India Ministry of Finance,

the income escaping assessment upto a sum of

Rs.25,000/- is immune from prosecution. In the

present case, the tax amount involved is less than

Rs.25,000/-

and

therefore,

he

submits

that

proceedings are liable to be quashed.

5

6.

The learned counsel for the respondent

would submit that as per the above circular, if the

amount is less than Rs.10,000/-, the prosecution

need not be initiated for an offence under Section

276C(2) of the Act.

7.

In the instant case, according to the

complainant, the self assessment tax was paid at

lesser amount than shown in the counterfoil of the

income tax ch