Strict construction of deeming provisions limits judicial proceeding fiction to expressly named penal offences

Proceedings before an income tax officer under Section 23(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 were not judicial proceedings for sustaining a conviction under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 37 of the 1922 Act deems such proceedings to be judicial proceedings only for the limited purposes of Sections 193 and 228 of the Penal Code, and the deeming fiction, being penal in character, must be strictly construed. Because Section 196 was not expressly mentioned, the fiction could not be extended to that offence, and the conviction and sentence under Section 196 were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether proceedings before the income tax officer under Section 23(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 could be treated as a judicial proceeding for the purpose of sustaining a conviction under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Analysis: Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 expressly deems proceedings before the income tax officer, Assistant Commissioner, or Commissioner to be judicial proceedings only for the purposes of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The provision is penal in character and must be construed strictly. Since Section 37 makes no reference to Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the deeming fiction cannot be extended beyond the offences specifically mentioned. Proceedings under Section 23(2) therefore could not be treated as judicial proceedings for the purpose of Section 196.

Conclusion: The conviction and sentence under Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 were not sustainable and were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory deeming provision creating judicial proceedings for specified penal sections must be strictly construed and cannot be extended to offences not expressly mentioned in the provision.

---