TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the criminal complaint under section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with sections 193 and 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, could be quashed at the pre-trial stage and whether the petition for discharge deserved to be allowed.
Analysis: At the stage of quashing, the Court applied the settled principle that criminal proceedings can be interfered with only in exceptional cases and that the allegations and supporting material must be taken at face value. The Court noted that the prosecution alleged false and contradictory statements made during and after the search, and held that the truthfulness of those statements could not be examined in detail before evidence was led. The Court also relied on section 278E of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which raises a presumption as to culpable mental state in prosecutions under the Act, leaving the accused to establish the absence of such mental state at trial.
Conclusion: The petition for quashing and discharge failed, as the complaint disclosed a prima facie offence and no ground for interference was made out.
Ratio Decidendi: In prosecutions under the Income-tax Act, 1961, a complaint is not to be quashed at the threshold where the allegations, taken at face value, disclose an offence and the question of culpable mental state is statutorily governed by a presumption that must be rebutted at trial.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
