TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (5) TMI 483
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd for a period of two years of good conduct, the present appeal has been filed. 2. Short facts of the case are that a private complaint was filed against four accused namely M/s. Rajkamal Agencies, a registered partnership firm and its three partners Smt. Mamta Sethi, Smt. Sheela Jain and Rameshchandra Sethi under section 276C, 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and under section 420 read with section 511 of the Indian Penal Code on March 29, 1985, by the then Income-tax Officer Mr. N. R Gupta under the directions of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal, under section 279 of the Income-tax Act (which shall be referred hereinafter as the "Act"). In the complaint it was alleged that the firm M/s. Rajkamal Agency credited Rs.50,000 in its ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as allowed by the apex court vide order dated August 11, 2000 (Union of India v. Smt. Mamta Sethi [2001] 248 ITR 102 (SC)) and the order passed by this court was set aside with the following directions (page 102): "The contention of the appellant-Union is that the trial court as well as the High Court missed to notice section 292A of the Income-tax Act containing an express bar against the invocation of the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act in respect of the offence enumerated in the Income-tax Act. Prima facie, the said interdict is insurmountable but learned counsel for the respondents contended that they are able to convince the High Court that they are not liable to conviction at all under section 276C or 277 of the Income....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 24 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The standing counsel of the Department is not appointed as public prosecutor within the meaning of section 24(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant under section 377(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, is not maintainable. For this contention reliance is placed on a decision in the matter of Assistant Collector of Central Excise v. Krishnamoorty, AIR 1997 SC 1904, wherein in appeal for enhancement on account of inadequacy, the hon'ble apex court held that the public prosecutor and not complainant has locus standi to file appeal. Learned counsel further submits that the appeal filed by the appellant also deserves to be dismissed as the partners of a firm cannot b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....yment of any tax, penalty or interest under this Act, he shall, without prejudice to any penalty that may be imposable on him under any other provision of this Act, be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three months but which may extend to three years and shall, in the discretion of the court, also be liable to fine." Section 277 reads as under: False statement in verification, etc.- If a person makes a statement in any verification under this Act or under any rule made there under, or delivers an account or statement which is false, and which he either knows or believes to be false, or does not believe to be true, he shall be punishable,- (i) in a case where the amount of tax, which would....