1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- 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.
<h1>Court quashes prosecution for tax offences due to lack of essential elements.</h1> The court quashed the prosecution against the petitioner for offences under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court found that the ... False Statement, Wilful Attempt To Evade Tax Issues:1. Quashing of prosecution against the petitioner for offences under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:The petitioner filed a petition seeking the quashing of prosecution for offences under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The complaint alleged that the petitioner attempted to evade tax and concealed income for the assessment year 1988-89. The Income-tax Officer made various additions to the petitioner's income during assessment, including on estimate basis. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) later modified these additions, reducing some amounts. The primary ground for prosecution was an addition of Rs. 94,500 as income from undisclosed sources, which was later struck down on appeal. The petitioner argued that no offence was made out based on subsequent events where authorities did not find undisclosed income, but made additions on estimates. The court agreed, stating that the prosecution was based on guesswork and lacked essential ingredients of the offences under sections 276C and 277.The court analyzed the provisions of section 276C, which deals with wilful attempt to evade tax. It noted that the complaint did not establish any of the conditions specified in the section. The court found that the additions made on estimate basis during assessment did not prove wilful evasion of tax by the petitioner. The court emphasized that the complaint must contain facts demonstrating the offence, which were lacking in this case. The court highlighted that the assessment order incorporating directions from the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) contradicted the allegations in the complaint, further weakening the prosecution's case under sections 276C and 277.The court considered the arguments presented by the Revenue's counsel, referencing relevant cases. However, the court held that the subsequent events, such as reassessment proceedings and orders after appeal, were relevant in determining the sustainability of the prosecution. The court rejected the Revenue's arguments and emphasized that the trial court could consider post-complaint developments to assess the validity of the prosecution. The court concluded that the prosecution against the petitioner under sections 276C and 277 was unsustainable, as no offence was established based on the facts and subsequent events. Therefore, the court quashed the criminal prosecution against the petitioner and discharged him from bail bonds, deeming any continuation of the prosecution in this case an abuse of the court's process.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
