https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25777 In a quashing petition under section 482 CrPC, the HC held that the complaint, read at face value, disclosed a prima facie offence under the Income-tax Act and IPC allegations, so interference at the threshold was unwarranted. It held that questions about the truth of the bogus donation allegations, the adequacy of any pre-prosecution opportunity, and defences based on mens rea or section 278B were matters for trial or preliminary objections before the Magistrate. The complaint's authorisation and the allegations that directors led and participated in the impugned acts were sufficient to permit the prosecution to continue. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Jan 2010 17:50:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25777 In a quashing petition under section 482 CrPC, the HC held that the complaint, read at face value, disclosed a prima facie offence under the Income-tax Act and IPC allegations, so interference at the threshold was unwarranted. It held that questions about the truth of the bogus donation allegations, the adequacy of any pre-prosecution opportunity, and defences based on mens rea or section 278B were matters for trial or preliminary objections before the Magistrate. The complaint's authorisation and the allegations that directors led and participated in the impugned acts were sufficient to permit the prosecution to continue. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25777