https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21879 Where a single transaction included offences requiring a complaint under section 195 CrPC and distinct offences that did not, the statutory bar applied only to sections 193 and 196 IPC arising from the sworn statement before the raiding officer, not to the entire prosecution. Prosecution under sections 276C, 277 and 278 of the Income-tax Act was held maintainable despite pending assessment or penalty proceedings, and section 279 did not bar the case where authorisation existed and no waiver or reduction of penalty under section 273A was shown. A revised return, amnesty claim and Chapter XX-A context did not wipe out criminal liability, and prima facie materials supported conspiracy and cheating charges. en-us Thu, 13 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:50:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21879 Where a single transaction included offences requiring a complaint under section 195 CrPC and distinct offences that did not, the statutory bar applied only to sections 193 and 196 IPC arising from the sworn statement before the raiding officer, not to the entire prosecution. Prosecution under sections 276C, 277 and 278 of the Income-tax Act was held maintainable despite pending assessment or penalty proceedings, and section 279 did not bar the case where authorisation existed and no waiver or reduction of penalty under section 273A was shown. A revised return, amnesty claim and Chapter XX-A context did not wipe out criminal liability, and prima facie materials supported conspiracy and cheating charges. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 13 Jun 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21879