TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (7) TMI 39
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n its basis, summons were issued to all the respondents for appearance and facing trial. M/s. Lalji & Co. and its three partners, who are impleaded as respondents No. 6 to 8 in that complaint, feeling aggrieved against the service of those summons on them, have now moved this petition for setting aside and/or quashing the issue of process to them by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Notice to show cause why this petition be not admitted, was issued to the respondents including the complainant-ITO. Some of them have been served. The petition is contested and opposed by the complainant-ITO. After hearing the present petitioner and the said complainant, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case for admission. The petition i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not bring out the commission of the offence alleged, there would be no question of appreciation of the evidence or possibilities. It would be merely looking at the complaint to decide whether the offence alleged is disclosed or not, and if it is patent that none such was disclosed, it would be mainfestly unjust and an abuse of the process of the court to allow the issue of process to subsist and the trial to proceed. I am of the considered opinion that the present case falls in this latter category. Briefly stated, the averments made in the complaint are that the Maharaja of Gwalior wanted to dispose of his jewellery worth about rupees 40 lakhs. M/s. Shanti Vijay & Co. (hereinafter mentioned as accused No. 1), entered into negotiations ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... some commission to those persons for lending their names. The amounts of those cash credits were, therefore, treated as part of the income of accused No. 1. This addition in the assessment has been upheld by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Accused No. 6, i.e., M/s. Lalji & Co., in similar manner purported to obtain loans worth Rs. 13,25,000 from different persons and made entries of cash credits in their account books. Their scrutiny at the assessment stage of this accused at Bombay cast considerable cloud on their genuineness. Ultimately, this accused made a voluntary disclosure before the income-tax authorities and entered into a settlement with them under s. 271(4A) of the I.T. Act. The settlement covered assessment years 1966-67 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d No. 1 or to accused No. 6. The amount of Rs. 8,15,000 in the books of accused No. 1 was in fact its concealed income from undisclosed sources. Investigations revealed that most of these parties were introduced to the accused firm by accused No. 6. When the fraud came to light, M/s. Lalji & Co., accused No. 6, came up with a settlement petition under section 271(4A) of the Act surrendering a total amount Rs. 2,65,009 which included the loans allegedly raised from the following parties : 1. M/s. Rasik Lal C. Shah, 2. Sh. Rasik Lal Tribhuvan, 3. Sh. Kanti Lal Khokhani, 4. Sh. N. R. Vakharia. As already noted above, so far as the raising of loans of Rs. 13,25,000, the chapter already stands closed and is not germane to the tria....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the extent of allegations and the complainant cannot travel beyond the same. The accused persons too have to meet the allegations made in the complaint, and not that they are to be met unaware and with surprise with new or additional allegations. The basic document thus remains to be the complaint and it has to be ascertained on its plain reading whether any case at all is made out against accused No. 1 and its partners. As noted above, the only allegation against accused No. 6 is that it had introduced those parties to accused No. 1. Such introduction does not per se amount to commission of any offence or abetment in the filing later by accused No. 1 of any wrong return, statement or account. No mala fides, collusion or conspiracy in th....