https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21877 Section 277 of the Income-tax Act is broad enough to cover any person who knowingly makes a false statement or verification, and is not confined to an assessee; on the facts discussed, prosecution against an income-tax practitioner was therefore maintainable. The commentary also states that sanction under the Income-tax Act is not required for Indian Penal Code offences, that a complaint authorised by the competent Commissioner is competent even if not personally filed by that authority, and that no prior notice under section 276CC is needed where the allegation is forgery or false verification rather than failure to file a return. Territorial and drafting objections were likewise rejected. en-us Fri, 02 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:46:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21877 Section 277 of the Income-tax Act is broad enough to cover any person who knowingly makes a false statement or verification, and is not confined to an assessee; on the facts discussed, prosecution against an income-tax practitioner was therefore maintainable. The commentary also states that sanction under the Income-tax Act is not required for Indian Penal Code offences, that a complaint authorised by the competent Commissioner is competent even if not personally filed by that authority, and that no prior notice under section 276CC is needed where the allegation is forgery or false verification rather than failure to file a return. Territorial and drafting objections were likewise rejected. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Sep 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21877