TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1983 (4) TMI 15
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stead of rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 1,000 on each count with a direction for the substantive sentences to run concurrently and in the event of non-payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for three months. There is a firm called " M/s. Satya Trading Corporation " of which, among others, the applicants are partners. This firm for the year 1972-73 submitted its balance-sheet showing that the co-accused Sureshchandra Sakorikar (since acquitted), was its (firm's) creditor in a sum of Rs. 17,000. Mr. Nazirsingh (P.W.1), the ITO, with regard to this item of Rs. 17,000, conducted an inquiry during the course of which the pronotes (Exts. P-9, P-10, P-11 and P-12) purporting to be executed on July 3, 1972, July 10, 1972,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cants of other offences (punishable under ss. 420/511 and 468, IPC, and ss. 277 and 278B of the I.T. Act), but finding them guilty of offences punishable under ss. 193 and 467, IPC, sentenced them, from which the applicants appealed, but only partly successfully, to the Sessions judge, to which a detailed reference has already been made in the opening paragraph of this order. The contention by the learned counsel for the applicants is that if their defence and explanation are given weight, they could not have been convicted of the two offences and punished for them. The defence of the applicants was that the ITO during the inquiry of the assessment proceedings would often call Daljeet Singh, in spite of the consolidated pronote (Ex. P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....false and which the person practising the deceit knows it to be so or believes to be false or makes the statement recklessly whether it is true or false. " Defrauding " is a kind of deceit; it means causing some kind of injury or loss by deceit, but the nature of the injury or loss may sometimes be difficult to define. The intent need not necessarily be to obtain property ; an intent to obtain employment, or a professional qualification, may also be sufficient. By defrauding is meant to induce a course of action (or inaction), while deceiving merely includes inducing a state of mind. Section 24 of the IPC defines " dishonestly " : whoever does anything with intent to cause wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another person, is s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ttedly, the two applicants had made the pronotes, one of them executing them and the other attesting them. They had contained representations in writing, inducing the ITO to believe that they were executed on the dates on which they were purported to have been executed which the applicants knew was not true. The representations contained in those documents were made solely for the purpose that the firm of which the applicants are partners could get benefit by paying less income-tax as a result of the misrepresentation that the acquitted co-accused, Sakorikar, had advanced those loans to them on the dates appearing in those false documents. If it was an advantage or benefit to the applicants on the one hand, it was a corresponding loss to th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on. This case is easily distinguishable on facts. The cattle having been certainly brought to the market place on the date in question, the accused had not made a false statement. His act was innocent. The appellants by producing the forged pronotes before the ITO undoubtedly, in the circumstances, had done so with intent that the ITO may entertain an erroneous opinion about those documents being executed and attested on dates on which in fact they were not executed or attested. Similarly, the other cases of Mangalsingh v. State, AIR 1956 Pat 154, Emperor v. Govind Singh, AIR 1926 Pat. 535 and Dr. Vimla v. Delhi Administration, [1963] 33 Corn Cas 279; AIR 1963 SC 1572, had turned on their own facts. The learned Sessions judge has rightly re....