TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 686
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has dismissed the application under Section 320(5) of Cr.P.C. preferred by the petitioners seeking permission of the Court for compounding the offence under Section 276 C(1)(i) of Income Tax Act, 1961. Facts of the case in short are that petitioners are the directions of the company namely M/s Chandraprabhu Homes Pvt. Ltd. indulged in the business of purchase, sale and development of plots in Indore and respondent nos.2 to 4 are also other Directions of the said company. Due to the dispute between the petitioners and respondent nos.2 and 3, they filed complaint before the Income Tax Department against each other. Thereafter, the petitioners were removed from the Directorship of the company w.e.f. 12.04.2006 vide letter dated 28.04.2006, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for compounding the offence before the competent authority. Thereafter, the respondent no.1 was directed to file/produce orders and relevant documents regarding said application. But, vide the impugned order, in absence of the written reply to the petitioner's application, solely on the submissions and instructions of Advocate of respondent no.1, the application of the petitioner was rejected vide the impugned order. Hence, the present petition before this Court. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order passed by the learned Appellate Court is illegal, improper and incorrect and contrary to the record and guidelines issued by the Ministry of Finance, Govt. of India. The learned appellate Court has wron....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., Indore dated 14.09.2021 for rejection of compounding petition. Actually,the compounding petition was rejected on 10.12.2021 i.e. after one month and 10 days of passing of the impugned order. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner place reliance over the judgement of Honble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Sharma vs. Union of India (2007) 9 SCC 158 whereby the Apex Court has held that the purpose of compounding of offence against payment of compounding amount is to prevent litigation and encourage early settlement of disputes. Learned Senior counsel further placed reliance over the judgment of High Court of Madras in the case of M/s.V.A. Haseeb & Co.Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (WP No.32731/2015) whereby the Madras Hig....