https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402891 Prosecution for offences under the Income-tax Act based on search material and third-party statements was treated as premature where the alleged concealment had not first been crystallised by the Assessing Officer or an officer authorised by him. The Court read sections 276C, 277, 278 and 279 with section 136 and held that, in complaints for false return, false verification or concealment emerging from assessment proceedings, mere suspicion, third-party material or an opinion of the Deputy Director was insufficient. Because the complaint rested on unverified inference rather than completed findings of concealment or wilful evasion, it was found not maintainable at that stage. en-us Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Mar 2021 15:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402891 Prosecution for offences under the Income-tax Act based on search material and third-party statements was treated as premature where the alleged concealment had not first been crystallised by the Assessing Officer or an officer authorised by him. The Court read sections 276C, 277, 278 and 279 with section 136 and held that, in complaints for false return, false verification or concealment emerging from assessment proceedings, mere suspicion, third-party material or an opinion of the Deputy Director was insufficient. Because the complaint rested on unverified inference rather than completed findings of concealment or wilful evasion, it was found not maintainable at that stage. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 11 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402891