Belated return filing does not cure tax prosecution default; culpable mental state presumption must be tested at trial.

A return filed under Section 139(4) does not cure the default of failing to furnish the return within time under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act. In proceedings under Section 482 CrPC, allegations that the return was belated and self-assessment tax was paid later were sufficient to disclose a prima facie basis for prosecution under Sections 276CC and 276C(2). The statutory presumption of culpable mental state under Section 278E could not be displaced at the pre-trial stage, and the issue of absence of wilfulness was left for trial. The criminal complaint was therefore not liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the criminal complaint alleging offences under Sections 276CC and 276C(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be quashed on the ground that the return was filed belatedly and the self-assessment tax was paid later, and whether the statutory presumption under Section 278E could be displaced at that stage.

Analysis: The return for the relevant assessment year was required under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 within the prescribed time, and the later filing under Section 139(4) did not erase the default under Section 139(1). The alleged delay in payment of self-assessment tax, coupled with the complaint allegations, was sufficient to constitute a prima facie foundation for prosecution under Sections 276CC and 276C(2). Section 278E introduced a presumption as to culpable mental state, and the question of absence of wilfulness was held to be a matter for trial, not for determination in a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Conclusion: The complaint disclosed a prima facie case, and the proceedings were not liable to be quashed.

Final Conclusion: The criminal prosecution was permitted to proceed, with the accused left to establish the defence before the trial court in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: Filing a return within the extended period under Section 139(4) does not cure the failure to furnish the return in due time under Section 139(1), and the statutory presumption of culpable mental state under Section 278E prevents quashing at the pre-trial stage on a plea of absence of wilfulness.

---