TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether compounding of an offence under the Income-tax Act could be directed after conviction when the conviction had not been set aside and only the appeal against conviction was pending.
Analysis: Section 279(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 empowers the competent income-tax authority to compound an offence either before or after institution of proceedings, but the compounding guidelines restrict that power. The guidelines required compliance with the stated eligibility conditions and also indicated that offences committed by a person already convicted by a court of law under direct tax laws would not normally be compounded. The petitioners remained convicted persons at the relevant time, and the pendency of the criminal appeal did not erase the conviction. Compounding was therefore not a matter of right and no writ direction could be issued to compel the authority to compound the offence.
Conclusion: The request for compounding after conviction was rightly declined and the petition failed.
Final Conclusion: The challenge to the refusal of compounding was rejected, leaving the authority's decision intact.
Ratio Decidendi: Under Section 279(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and the governing compounding guidelines, compounding may be considered only within the prescribed eligibility framework and cannot be compelled as a matter of right after a conviction that continues to subsist.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
