1966 (9) TMI 124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 35, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three weeks in each case, by the Fourth Presidency Magistrate, Madras. These revisions relate to non-payment of tax for the years 1954-55 to 1961-62. There is no dispute in these cases that the demand notices were served on the petitioner. The petitioner asked for time for payment. In spite of the authorities ha....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... otherwise. There must be an element of deception, to bring it within the scope of section 25, Indian Penal Code. It must be understood in its ordinary and popular sense. The learned Magistrate has, in finding that the petitioner evaded payment of tax fraudulently, observed as follows in C.T. Nos. 32, 34 and 35 of 1964: "There is no reason why the accused failed to pay the amount in spite of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Magistrate seems to be under the impression that the petitioner should show that the evasion was not fraudulent. It is a well-established principle that the ingredients of the offence should be proved by the prosecution to bring home the guilt against the accused. There is absolutely no evidence in these cases to infer that the evasion was fraudulent and that the petitioner had the intention to de....