Just a moment...
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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether criminal proceedings for offences under the Income-tax Act could be quashed merely because the assessment order had been set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment.
Analysis: The pendency or remand of reassessment proceedings does not, by itself, bar prosecution where the complaint is supported by material independent of the assessment order. The existence of a remand may be relevant on the facts, but quashing is not warranted as a general rule solely because the assessment has been reopened. At the same time, where reassessment is imminent and may have a bearing on the criminal case, the criminal court may, in its discretion, adjourn or postpone the hearing under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Conclusion: The petition for quashing was not maintainable on the ground urged and was dismissed, though liberty was left to seek an adjournment or postponement before the trial court if reassessment proceedings were still pending.
Ratio Decidendi: Setting aside of an assessment order and remand for reassessment does not automatically extinguish criminal liability or require quashing of prosecution; at most, it may justify a judicially controlled postponement where the reassessment is imminent and relevant to the criminal charge.