Probation barred for income-tax conviction under section 292-A; custodial sentence and fine follow for related false-evidence offence.

Section 292-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 bars probation under section 360 CrPC and the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 for a person convicted under the Act unless the offender is under eighteen years of age. Because the offence was committed after the provision came into force and the convicted person was above that age, probation was unavailable. The article also notes that concealment of income and property was treated as a grave economic offence warranting custodial punishment, and that once probation was excluded for the income-tax offence, the separate conviction under section 193 IPC also required a substantive sentence. Rigorous imprisonment and fine were imposed under section 277, with rigorous imprisonment under section 193 to run concurrently.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person above eighteen years convicted under section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be granted probation in view of section 292-A of that Act, and what sentence should follow for the conviction under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code.

Analysis: The statutory bar in section 292-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 excludes the application of section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 to a person convicted of an offence under the Act unless he is under eighteen years of age. The offence in question was committed after the provision came into force, and the respondent was not within the protected age limit. The offence involved concealment of property and income and was treated as an economic offence of grave nature, for which the Act itself contemplates a minimum custodial sentence. Since the respondent was also convicted under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, the sentence for that offence could not be left unsaddled once probation was unavailable for the income-tax offence.

Conclusion: Probation was not permissible under section 292-A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the respondent was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fine under section 277 of that Act and to rigorous imprisonment under section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, with the substantive sentences to run concurrently.

---