https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19649 Cancellation of penalty by the Tribunal did not, by itself, establish that there had been no concealment of income, so the criminal prosecution for income-tax offences was not barred. The departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings were treated as parallel, and the findings in the tax proceedings were not binding on the criminal court. Section 279(1A) was held inapplicable because there had been no reduction or waiver of penalty under section 273A. Acceptance of the revised return also did not erase the allegation that the original return had suppressed income, so quashing was refused. en-us Fri, 25 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Nov 2009 16:26:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19649 Cancellation of penalty by the Tribunal did not, by itself, establish that there had been no concealment of income, so the criminal prosecution for income-tax offences was not barred. The departmental proceedings and criminal proceedings were treated as parallel, and the findings in the tax proceedings were not binding on the criminal court. Section 279(1A) was held inapplicable because there had been no reduction or waiver of penalty under section 273A. Acceptance of the revised return also did not erase the allegation that the original return had suppressed income, so quashing was refused. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19649