Belated correction of a false tax claim does not negate mens rea when disclosure follows an Assessing Officer query.

A belated correction of a false income-tax claim, made only after the Assessing Officer raised a specific query, did not negate liability or establish absence of mens rea. The court found that the assessee had ample opportunity to disclose the error earlier or file a revised return, but did not do so. On that factual record, the plea that the incorrect depreciation entry was a mere clerical or inadvertent accounting mistake was rejected, and the conviction was held to be reasoned and free from infirmity. The challenge to the conviction therefore failed under Sections 266C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction and sentence for furnishing a false claim in the income-tax return could be interfered with on the grounds that the error was a clerical mistake, was later corrected, and lacked mens rea.

Analysis: The correction was not made immediately upon discovery and was brought to the tax authorities' notice only after assessment proceedings had already raised a query on the depreciation claim. The record showed that the assessee had ample to disclose the error earlier or file a revised return, but no such prompt corrective step was taken. In those circumstances, the plea that the entry was a mere inadvertent accounting mistake was not accepted, and the surrounding conduct supported the finding that the order of conviction was reasoned and free from infirmity.

Conclusion: The challenge to the conviction failed and the petitioner remained liable under Sections 266C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Ratio Decidendi: A belated correction of a false or incorrect tax claim, after the Assessing Officer has already raised a specific query, does not by itself negate liability or establish absence of mens rea.

---