https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14683 A tax prosecution complaint alleging concealment of income through overstated liabilities, understated assets and false verification was considered under the settled principle that inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC is exercised sparingly. On the pleaded facts, the complaint was treated as disclosing a prima facie case, so its truth or sufficiency could not be tested at the quashing stage. A limitation objection under section 468 CrPC was also rejected on the material before the Court, as the prosecution was not shown to be clearly time-barred on the face of the record. en-us Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Jul 2009 10:45:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14683 A tax prosecution complaint alleging concealment of income through overstated liabilities, understated assets and false verification was considered under the settled principle that inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC is exercised sparingly. On the pleaded facts, the complaint was treated as disclosing a prima facie case, so its truth or sufficiency could not be tested at the quashing stage. A limitation objection under section 468 CrPC was also rejected on the material before the Court, as the prosecution was not shown to be clearly time-barred on the face of the record. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14683