<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (7) TMI 799 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425244</link>
    <description>Pendency of income-tax appeals and belated tax payment do not, by themselves, bar prosecution for failure to file returns on time or for willful attempt to evade tax under the Income-tax Act. The offences were treated as distinct from assessment or appellate proceedings, and earlier compounding in some matters did not create an automatic entitlement to similar treatment in remaining cases. For quashing under Section 482 CrPC, allegations of mala fides, non-service, absence of the assessee, and communication gaps with a representative were found insufficient where the complaints disclosed late filing, suppression of income, and the statutory presumption under Section 278E applied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2022 12:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=685428" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 799 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425244</link>
      <description>Pendency of income-tax appeals and belated tax payment do not, by themselves, bar prosecution for failure to file returns on time or for willful attempt to evade tax under the Income-tax Act. The offences were treated as distinct from assessment or appellate proceedings, and earlier compounding in some matters did not create an automatic entitlement to similar treatment in remaining cases. For quashing under Section 482 CrPC, allegations of mala fides, non-service, absence of the assessee, and communication gaps with a representative were found insufficient where the complaints disclosed late filing, suppression of income, and the statutory presumption under Section 278E applied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=425244</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>