TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (9) TMI 209
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... belated filing of the returns, she had been penalised departmentally as well as prosecuted criminally. The criminal prosecution ended in a conviction by imposing rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6 months and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for each of the assessment years. This sentence imposed on the petitioner has been suspended in Criminal Appeal No.227 of 2010 by the learned Principal Sessions Judge and the appeal is pending before the Sessions Court. The petitioner setting out the peculiar facts and circumstance of the case and that the petitioner having already paid the entire tax in terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court Tax Cases (Appeal)No.761 to 764 of 2004 approached the Principal Chief Commissione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ligibility conditions for consideration of a case for compounding and in terms of Clause 4.4 (f), if the order of conviction has been passed by the court, then the case cannot be compounded. 5. The issue as to how the the power of compounding of offences should be exercised had come up for consideration before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this court in an appeal filed by the Revenue in the case of Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes and others vs. Umayal Ramanathan reported in (2009) 313 ITR 59 (Mad). In the said case also there was a conviction of the assessee by the Criminal Court and revision petition challenging the conviction was pending. The counsel for the assessee therein pointed out that section 279 (2) of the Act is prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re this Court in Crl.R.C. No. 588 of 1996, the assessee has filed similar petition for compounding the offence, which was entertained by the appellants after obtaining leave by filing Crl.M.P. No. 984 of 2000 in Crl.R.C. No. 588 of 1996, while so, refusing the same relief to the respondent, where the trial court alone convicted her and the appeal is pending, is discriminatory. Now we look into Section 279 (2) of the Act, which reads as under:- "279.Prosecution to be at instance of Chief Commissioner or Commissioner. (1) .... (2) Any offence under this Chapter may either before or after the institution of proceedings, be compounded by the Chief Commissioner or a Director General...." It is evident from Section 279 (2) of the Act t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Pradesh and others, AIR 1995 SC 807 wherein in Paragraph 3, it was held thus (page 809):- ".....Therefore, the term 'proceeding' in S.29 is a very wide term to mean a prescribed course of action to enforce the legal right. It indicates the prescribed mode in which the judicial business is conducted. The execution is a step in the judicial process. It seeks to enforce the final order to realise the result of the adjudication." The term proceeding shall also include the proceedings at the appellate stage. In (Lachhman Dass Vs. Santokh Singh) (1995) 4 SCC 201 in para-7, it was held by the Honourable Supreme Curt thus:- ".....Precisely stated, an appeal is a continuation of a suit or proceedings wherein the entire proceedings are ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellants have refused to exercise such power in the case on hand by misinterpreting Section 279 (2) of the Act, which is unfair. The learned single Judge considered the above said facts and rightly set aside the order passed by the third appellant, hence, the writ appeal is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected W.A.M.P. No. 540 of 2003 is closed. In view of the fact that the respondent is aged about 83 years, who has filed the petition for compounding as early as on 09.04.2001, which was rejected by the third appellant on 02.08.2002, to meet the ends of justice, it is warranted to direct the parties as follows:- i) The respondent is permitted to pay the amount demanded by the appellants for compounding of the offence within a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decision as to whether the facts make out a case for compounding even in cases where there is a conviction by a Court of law. Thus the guidelines did not place any fetters on the power of the competent authority to examine cases for compounding. However, this cannot be an universal yardstick and these observations are made by this court considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case as pointed out earlier. 8. The petitioner is a senior citizen aged more than 70 years, she has lost her husband and she lost her son and she is the sole proprietrix of the small firm dealing in Electrical and Electronic Appliances. She has paid the entire tax after the decision was rendered by the Honble Division Bench in Tax Cases (Appeal)No.761....