TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (7) TMI 20
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner"), is a registered firm engaged in the manufacture and sale of cycle parts at Ludhiana. The constitution of the firm is as under : Narinder Singh 65 per cent. Harbans Lal 35 per cent. The return of income for the assessment year 1973-74 filed on September 15, 1973, was duly verified by Narinder Singh, partner, by means of a declaration dated September 14, 1973. The total income shown was Rs. 31,608 under the head "Business income", It was accompanied by a trading account, profit and loss account and balance-sheet. On November 14, 1975, the CIA staff, Ludhiana, had seized the account books of the petitioner-firm. Cash book and ledger for the financial year 1973-74, summoned by Shri R. D. Mann, Income-tax Officer, under secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) granted relief out of the said amount to the extent of Rs. 1,64,000 apart from other rebates. Against this order, the petitioner has filed an appeal for further relief to which he entitled. It is further alleged that the complaint is barred by time under section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code"). The respondent in its written reply has admitted the factual position of this case but it is denied that the complaint is barred by time. Inter alia, it is pleaded that the case in hand relates to the economic offence which is covered under the Act. Therefore, the period of limitation mentioned in section 468 of the Code would not apply as is clear from the inapplicab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the date of filing of the order, i.e., September 15, 1973, and 12 years approximately from the date of passing of the assessment order. Therefore, the complaint is also barred by time. Shri Sunil Chadha contended that for the assessment year 1973-74, certain amount has been added and the Income-tax Officer had again directed that penalty notices under sections 271(1)(a), 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c) and 273(c) of the Act be issued, but till date no penalty proceedings have been initiated as the matter is sub judice before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Annexure P-14 is a copy of the order dated March 29, 1988, relating to the assessment year 1973-74. Since the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending before the Commissioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s observed a number of times that for the purpose of exercising its power under section 482 of the Code to quash an FIR or a complaint, the High Court would have to proceed in the matter on the basis of the allegations made in the complaint or the documents accompanying the same per se ; it has no jurisdiction to examine the correctness or otherwise of the allegations. In Satyinder Kaur v. State (Government of NCT of Delhi) [1999] 4 RCR (Criminal) 503 (SC), the law enunciated by the apex court for quashing of FIR has been summed up. Also it had been observed that while exercising the jurisdiction under section 482 of the Code, the court should bear in mind what has been observed in State of Kerala v. O. C. Kuttan, AIR 1999 SC 1044 ; [1999] ....