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

2011 Supreme(Mad) 1189

2011 (1) LW(Crl) 571
High Court of Judicature at Madras
C.S. KARNAN
Smt. Vijayashanthi
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner, Income Tax, Chennai
Crl.O.P.Nos. 27158, 27159, 27160 of 2007 & M.P.No.1 & 2 of 2007
Decided on : 04-03-2011

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:I. David Singh, Advocate. For the Respondent: K. Ramasamy, Senior Counsel for Income-Tax Cases.

The court emphasized that failure to file the returns within the due time as required by the Income Tax Act, 1961 is a continuing offence, and the prosecution cannot be sustained if there is an inordinate delay or lack of valid reasons for the delay.

Headnote:

Income Tax - Criminal Prosecution - Sections 139(1), 139(4), 276CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a cine artiste, was charged with non-filing of income tax returns for the assessment years 1992-1993, 1993-1994, and 1994-1995. The petitioner claimed that the delay in filing the returns was due to the seizure of relevant documents by the income tax authorities.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner willfully and deliberately failed to file the returns within the stipulated time, despite receiving statutory notices and reminders. The court also noted an inordinate delay in initiating the prosecution case against the petitioner.

Issues: The issues raised included the validity of the prosecution, the impact of pending compounding petitions, and the delay in initiating the prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in filing the returns was not valid in the eyes of the law and that the prosecution was not sustainable under the circumstances.

Final Decision: The Criminal Proceedings arising from the complaint were quashed by the court.

Judgment :-

1. The above criminal original petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused to call for the records to dispense with her personal appearance in the E.O.C.C.117 of 2007, on the file of the Ist Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Economic offences, Egmore, Chennai - 8.

2. The summarised facts of the prosecution case are as follows:

The prosecution case filed by the Complainant/Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, media Circle II, Chennai - 34, which are as follows:

(ii)The complainant has filed on the sanction of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai-IV within the meaning of Sec.279(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 28.02.2007. The said sanction order under Section 279(1) is submitted along with this complaint before this Hon'ble Court.

(iii)The Complaint is in respect of the Assessment year 1992-1993, the relevant accounting year being the year ended 31.03.1992.

(iv)The accused is presently assessed by Income-tax in Media Circle - II in the Jurisdiction of the complainant.

(v)Notices and processes may be issued to the Accused at the address noted above.

(vi)The Accused is a Cine Artiste by profession.

(vii) The accused has filed her returns of income-tax up to the Assessment Year 1990-1991. For the Assessment year 1991-1992, the return was filed on 25.05.1993, which was beyond the time limit laid down even for a belated return. As such she is aware of her duties and responsibilities under the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The ostensible sources of income of the accused are income from house property, income from business of profession and agricultural income.

(viii) For the Assessment year 1992-1993, relevant to the previous year ended on 31.03.1992, the accused had the following incomes:

(a) Income from House Property

(b) Income from business/Profession

(c) Agricultural income

(ix) The accused ought to have filed her Return of income for the Assessment year 1992-1993 on or before 31.08.1992 as required under section 139(1) of Income-Tax Act, 1961. However, the accused did not file her return of income within the due date prescribed by the Statute. Thus, the accused has wilfully and deliberately contravened the provisions of section 139(1) of Income-Tax Act, 1961 by not furnishing her return of income on or before the due date prescribed by the Statute, i.e., 31.08.1992, without any valid reason and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 276CC of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. Even after search, the accused did not file her return deliberately inspite of having substantial income.

(x) As there was no voluntary compliance of filing the return of income within the due date, and as the failure in filing the said return of income still persisted, a notice under section 148 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 was issued to the accused on 02.02.1994, calling upon her to file the return of income within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice which was served on 04.04.1994. The accused neither sent any reply in response to the said statutory notice issued to her nor filed her return of income. Therefore, a notice under section 142(1) dated 20.07.1994, was issued to the accused requiring her to file the return of income. Again, there was no response from the accused and not even a reply was sent giving reasons why she is persisting in delaying the filing of the said return of income even after the statutory due date and inspite of receiving the statutory notice under section 148. By another letter dated 18.01.1996, the accused was again reminded of her obligation of filing of her return of income. Another show cause letter dated 04.03.1996, was issued to the accused drawing her attention to the prosecution proceedings that will be initiated in the event of non-filing of return within the stipulated time as per the Act and also informing her that exparte assessment will be framed resulting in penalty proceedings that will be initiated in the event of non-filing of return within stipulated time as per the Act and als














































































































































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 Back to top