TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 323
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Madurai, under Sections 120B read with Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. 2.The petitioner and other accused are said to have committed offences under Sections 120B and 420 of IPC and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the CBI registered a case in Crime No.RC 229 2021 A 0001. The first accused is the brother of the petitioner. The third accused is the wife of his brother, namely A1's wife. The prosecution case is that all the accused and other approvers conspired together to cheat the Income Tax Department, to the tune of Rs.3,42,77,901/-. A1 namely the brother of the petitioner is the Income Tax Consultant and he had employed number of per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o quash the proceedings against him. Apart from that, he also submitted that he was arrested and released on bail with a condition to report before the CBI office daily. At that time, one of the officers demanded Rs.7 lakhs to exonerate him from the criminal proceedings. He also produced CD relating to the entire conversation between the CBI officer and himself and also requested this Court to peruse the CD. He also stated that on the basis of that, he was falsely implicated in this case and hence, he seeks to exonerate him from the CBI case. 4.The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for CBI submitted that abundant material is available against him to frame the charges and the CBI collected the materials. More particularly, more th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r's account, there is a fraudulent entry of Rs.21,83,150/-. His digital signature also was used by A1. The entire family members namely, A1, A2 and A3 swindled the income tax amount. They have contrived scientific fraud in withdrawing the refund of Income Tax amount belonging to other tax payers, which is clearly revealed from the approvers statements. In the said circumstances, this Court need not go into further deliberation on the argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. If any further deliberation is made, it would affect the defence of the petitioner, during the course of the trial. Hence, this Court is not inclined to quash the petition by making the detailed deliberation on the defence raised by the petitione....