TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (10) TMI 78
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....., Messrs. Rayala Corporation (P.) Limited, Madras, for payment of tax from their employees, deducted tax at source but the same has not been remitted to the credit of the Central Government within a week without reasonable cause or excuse as required under section 276B of the Income-tax Act read with section 200 and rule 30 of the Income-tax Rules, and, therefore, they have committed an offence. The trial court, viz., the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences-I), Madras, found that the offence against the accused has been proved and, therefore, it convicted them and sentenced them to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000. But, in appeal by the accused, the learned Principal Sessions judge, Madras, disagreed with the finding of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....must be remembered that the charge has been framed by the court. In that charge, the words "without reasonable cause or excuse" are not mentioned. But all other particulars of the case against the accused have been stated. I am clearly of the opinion that, considering the provisions of section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as regards the fact of omission to frame, or absence of, or error in, charge, the absence of the said words in the charge alone will not vitiate the trial entitling the accused to an acquittal. I find there is absolutely nothing to show that, on account of the absence of those words, the accused has been in any way prejudiced. Regarding the point that no prosecution witness has spoken that the delay was without ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... accused has not chosen to examine anybody on their side to prove the same. In exhibit P-5 explanation given by the chief accountant of the accused company it is stated that, because the managing director of the company was in Ooty, the signature in the cheque could not be obtained, and it is further stated that, due to his pre-occupation's and other administrative charges, the tax deducted at source was not remitted into the Reserve Bank of India then and there. No court will accept this as reasonable cause or excuse for the long delay stated above. Therefore, it appears to me that the trial court has rightly convicted the accused but the appellate court has wrongly acquitted the accused. Mr. M. Karpagavinayagam, learned counsel appearing....