2001 (3) TMI 18

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to quash the above proceedings, the petitioner/the second accused, Dr. N. Kannan, has filed the above petitions. The following is the contention claiming that the proceedings as against the petitioner are liable to be quashed: 'The petitioner being a doctor is alleged to have issued a false certificate in favour of the first accused in order to abet the offence committed by the first accused for making an attempt to evade tax by giving false medical certificate. This allegation contained in the complaint would not constitute an offence because the averments in the complaint are very general in nature and prosecution case as against the petitioner on the basis of vague allegation that the D. D. O. originally failed to deduct a sum of R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... [2001] 247 ITR 497 (Mad), wherein it is held that a statement given by the co-accused cannot be treated as substantial evidence against other accused nor could it form the basis for conviction. On the other hand, Mr. Ramasamy, learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent, cited the following authorities: (1) Chinni Mohan Rao v. ITO [1996] 217 ITR 269 (Mad); (2) C. Surendran v. T. Ravindran [1996] 217 ITR 368 (Mad); (3) A. Y. Prabhakar (HUF) v. Assistant CIT [1996] 217 ITR 253 (Mad). He contended that there are allegations constituting offence alleged against the petitioner and, as such, the proceedings are not liable to be quashed. It is further contended that when there are clear averments in the complaint....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ained did not suffer from such disease as mentioned in the certificate. Further, as stated above, the Income-tax Officer obtained a statement from the first accused under section 131 of the Income-tax Act that he did not suffer from such disease. It is also specifically alleged in the complaint that the second accused by issuing knowingly a false certificate has actively abetted in enabling the first accused to get tax deduction benefit and thereby to reduce the tax liability on his salary income, the tax for which is deducted at source, thereby through his fraudulent claim, the first accused abetted by the second accused, had a wrong benefit to the extent of a sum of Rs.3,000. There are specific allegations in the complaint as contai....