TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 409
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Respondent herein and pending before the Court of Sh. D.K. Sharma, Ld. ACMM (Spl. Acts), Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi and after examining the same, quash the said Complaint and the proceedings pending before the Ld. ACMM; and B. Quash/set aside the Order dated 27.02.2015 passed in the abovementioned Criminal Complaint No. 100/4/15 dated 12.02.2015 titled "ITO Versus Shravan Gupta" instituted by the Respondent herein and pending before the Court of Sh. D.K. Sharma, Ld. ACMM (Spl. Acts), Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi, whereby the petitioner has been summoned by the Trial Court; and C. Quash/set aside the Sanction/Authorization dated 10.02.2015 granted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-I) for the commencement of prosecution against the petitioner." 3. When the petition was listed on 20th March, 2015 the learned counsel for the respondent was present and he made his submissions for some time. He was asked to file the reply. However, he submitted that he would make his submissions on the next date. When the matter was taken up on 23rd March, 2015, both the parties made their submissions and the order was reserved. As the matter was coming up before the trial court on 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Section 142(1) of the Act and in furtherance to the reply dated 19th January, 2015 sent another reply dated 9th February, 2015 whereby it was stated that the petitioner with great difficulty had been able to obtain the copy of the bank statement of the Account Number 12119836 at HSBC, Private Bank, Geneva, Switzerland for the entire period of operation of the said Account. This position was again reiterated by reply dated 11th February, 2015 which was received by the respondent on the same date. Accordingly, the petitioner in response to the notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act had allegedly furnished the Statement of Account for the entire period of operation of the account at HSBC, Private Bank, Geneva, Switzerland. 9. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Central-I), New Delhi on 10th February, 2015 authorized Dr. Surjeet Singh, ACIT, Central Circle 02, Income Tax Department, New Delhi to institute a Criminal Complaint under Section 276-D of the Act for the assessment year 2006-07. The respondent through Dr. Surjeet Singh, ACIT, Central Circle 02, Income Tax Department, New Delhi filed a Criminal Complaint dated 12th February, 2015 under Section 276-D of the Act. 10. It i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ings does not lead to presumption that the default was for sufficient reason. Non-initiation of penalty proceedings in a case cannot be equated with a case where the penalty proceedings were initiated. The assessee has surrendered the peak credit in foreign bank account, it clearly shows that he is in possession of the complete details of his said account including bank statements etc. which he has wilfully not furnished. 7. AND WHEREAS from the perusal of records placed before me, I am satisfied and am of the opinion that the assessee has wilfully not furnished the required details as per Notice U/s 142 (1) of the IT Act and has thus committed offence punishable u/s 276-D of the I.T. Act 1961. 8. AND THEREFORE I, Meeta Nambiar, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central-1), New Delhi in exercise of the power vested in me u/s 279(1) of the I.T. Act 1961 do hereby accord Sanction and Authorize Dr.Surjeet Singh, ACIT, Central Cir.2, New Delhi to initiate prosecution proceedings u/s 276-D of the Income Tax Act 1961 for A.Y. 2006-07 against Sh.Shravan Gupta, 44A, Amrita Shergil Marg, New Delhi-110003 at my instance in the Court of Competent Jurisdiction." 11. The Additional Chie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gh the office of the complainant." 12. It appears that the petitioner in compliance with notices issued under Section 142(1) of the Act and in furtherance to the reply dated 19th January, 2015 sent another reply dated 9th February, 2015 whereby it was stated that with great difficulty the petitioner had been able to obtain the copy of the bank statement of the Account Number 12119836 at HSBC, Private Bank, Geneva, Switzerland for the entire period of operation of the said account and again a letter dated 11th February, 2015 was sent in which the reference of letter dated 9th February, 2015 was mentioned. The said letters and bank statement furnished by the petitioner have not been discussed in sanction even no reference is given. 13. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has not denied the fact that the said letter dated 11th February, 2015 was received by the department. However, he was not sure whether the reply dated 9 th February, 2015 was received although copy of the reply was shown by Mr.Sethi Senior counsel which contained the office stamp of the respondent on the office copy of the said letter. 14. The argument of Mr.Sandeep Sethi, learned Senior counsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... with law had to be taken against the petitioner who would be entitled to contest the same in accordance with law. However, it is also a matter of fact that the criminal proceedings have been initiated by the respondent against the petitioner on the basis of the sanction issued by the department on 10th February, 2015 and in case the grounds of the sanction are read, it is evident that the reply sent by the petitioner contains the copy of the bank statement filed for the period has not been mentioned/ discussed in the same. 20. Even otherwise assuming for the sake of the argument that the reply dated 9 th February, 2015 was not put up before the appropriate officer, when the sanction was issued, it is the admitted position that the said complaint was filed on 12th February, 2015 when the letter dated 11th February, 2015 was admittedly received by the department. The factum of receipt of the said letter is not mentioned in the complaint. Assuming for the sake of the argument that even the said letter was not placed at the appropriate desk till 12th February, 2015 as counsel for the respondent mentioned to the court that usually any letter filed at the counter is received by the app....