TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1987 (4) TMI 395
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in these two rules which is a private limited company is sought to be prosecuted in two cases for an offence under section 276B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which is punishable with imprisonment and fine. In these rules seeking to quash the proceedings, it has been contended that the prosecution of the company for such an offence is incompetent because no sentence of imprisonment can be imposed o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld not be imprisoned, it could not also be prosecuted under the said section. On the other hand, it appears that a learned single judge of the Allahabad High Court in Laxmi Ratan Cotton Mills v. S. K. Bhatnagar [1975] Cri LJ 1881, upon which the learned Magistrate has relied, and also a learned single judge of the Madras High Court in Rayala Corporation ( P.) Ltd. v. V. M. Muthuramalingam, ITO [19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....being under a mandate of law to pass a sentence of imprisonment in the case of conviction under section 276B of the Act, it will have to do so which, however, will be incapable of execution as a company cannot be committed to prison. Since a court is not expected to make an order which is likely to be infructuous, it must be held that the Legislature never intended the prosecution of a company for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Madras High Courts, the principal officer may be prosecuted for an offence punishable under section 276B of the Act. It may also be noted in this connection that in Laxmi Ratan Cotton Mills' case [1975] Cri LJ 1881 (All.), to which reference has been made by the learned Magistrate, his Lordship had observed that since in the case before him, the company was not impleaded through its princi....