1994 (9) TMI 31

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the Second Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, (E. O. II), Egmore, Madras. The petitioner has been charged with the offences under sections 276C(1) and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sections 193, 196 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. In the complaint, the Income-tax Officer has alleged that the petitioner herein has suppressed his real income and Rs. 3,00,000 being the roya....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....though this petitioner had suppressed his real income and the observation of the Commissioner cannot be a basis for filing this complaint. The second contention is that as he has preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax and as he has a good chance of success in the appeal, and if the appeal is allowed then the question of prosecution wil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal, the Supreme Court in P. Jayappan v. S. K. Perumal, First ITO [1984] 149 ITR 696 has held that the pendency of the reassessment proceedings could not act as a bar to the institution of criminal prosecution for the offences punishable under section 276C or section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Magistrate has to independently assess the evidence t....