TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1994 (7) TMI 4
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Vijayawada, who was the complainant in C. C. No. 289 of 1989 on the file of the Special Judge for Economic Offences has filed this appeal against the judgment dated August 26, 1992, acquitting the respondents of offences under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case against the respondents was in brief as follows : The first respondent was a private limited company carrying ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tions. So, the claim for exemption that the income of Rs. 1,60,000 was by sale of agricultural produce was not accepted and it was further observed that R-1 company has wilfully attempted to avoid tax on Rs. 1,60,000. Gandhi Theatres (P.) Ltd. is a sister concern of the first respondent. It had purchased the leasehold rights of the film for Rs. 1,00,000 from April 1, 1983, to September 1, 1989, R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hapatnam, the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-I, Vijayawada, filed a complaint against the respondent for offences under sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act before the Special Judge for Economic Offences. The assessee filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal while this criminal case was pending before the special court. That appeal was allowed on May 8, 1990. ....