TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1972 (10) TMI 29
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a firm registered under the new Act. On September 13, 1962, one of the partners, the father of the other partners died, and a new partnership came into being on September 18, 1962. For the assessment year 1961-62, corresponding to the accounting year ending with May 31, 1960, the petitioner herein submitted a return on May 29, 1962, showing an income of Rs. 23,947. The Income-tax Officer called for the accounts of the firm for scrutiny. On examination he detected some suppression. He found that the accounts disclosed only utilisation of two tonnes of tin plates while on May 14, 1960, there was a release of 24.5 tonnes of tin plates from the key loan at the bank. The balance of 22.5 tonnes of tin plates was not accounted for in the closing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under section 277 of the new Act. On receipt of notice of this complaint, the petitioner filed O.P. No. 6468 of 1971 to quash that notice. The O.P. was dismissed in limine by this Court. A writ appeal filed against that decision also met with the same fate but the Division Bench directed that the petitioner will be at liberty to move this court with an application under section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code. Hence this petition. Various contentions were raised before this court by the learned counsel for the petitioner. I am here concerned only with the question whether there is any legal bar for the prosecution before the District Magistrate's Court either under the new Act or under the old Act. The jurisdiction of this court to interf....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) of the old Act, which reads as follows : " No prosecution for an offence against this Act shall be instituted in respect of the same facts on which a penalty has been imposed under this section . " The question therefore which falls for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to this protection and whether his case comes within section 28(4) of the old Act. The return in this case was submitted only on May 29, 1962, that is, after the coming into force of the new Act on April 1, 1962. Provision is made in the new Act for the procedure to be adopted in assessment proceedings for the period before the coming into force of the new Act depending upon the date of submission of the return. Section 297(1) of the new Act repeals the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessees have been classified into two groups : the first group is of those whose assessments have been completed before April 1, 1962, and it is provided that in such cases the penalty will be imposed under the old Act. The second group of assessees is of those whose assessment is completed on or after 1st day of April, 1962, and in their cases the imposition of penalty has to be under the new Act. In this case, the return itself was submitted only on May 29, 1962, and, therefore, it is clause (g) of section 297(2) that is attracted for the imposition of penalty on the petitioner. Section 28(4) of the old Act gives relief to an assessee from prosecution only if penalty is imposed under the old Act because the expression used in section 28....