Maintainability of tax prosecution complaint upheld where false statement allegations and Commissioner authorisation satisfied statutory requirements.

A complaint for a false statement under the Income-tax Act was treated as maintainable where prosecution was instituted at the Commissioner's instance under the statutory bar on prosecution except on such authorisation. On the materials, the petitioner's statement was found to fall within section 277, and the complainant had the necessary authority to lodge the complaint. No want of jurisdiction or legal infirmity was shown, so writ interference with the criminal proceedings was not warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint for an offence under section 277 of the Income-tax Act could validly be lodged on the Commissioner's authorisation and whether the writ court should interfere with the criminal proceedings.

Analysis: Section 277 of the Income-tax Act penalises making a false statement in verification or delivering a false account or statement. Section 279 bars prosecution for offences including section 277 except at the instance of the Commissioner. On the materials placed, the Court found that the petitioner's statement attracted section 277 and that the complainant had the requisite authority to institute the complaint. The Court found no want of jurisdiction and no legal infirmity warranting writ intervention.

Conclusion: The complaint was held to be competent and the challenge to the proceedings failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where prosecution for an offence under section 277 of the Income-tax Act is instituted at the instance of the Commissioner under section 279, and the facts disclose a prima facie false statement within section 277, the complaint is maintainable and writ interference is not called for.

---