AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 500
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....read with section 278B and 278E of the Income Tax Act 1961 ('the Act') and the summoning order dated 21.10.2024 passed therein, qua the Petitioner. 2. Succinctly stated, a compliant under section 200 of the CrPC was filed by Deputy Commissioner of the Income Tax Department alleging that Accused no. 2/Sh. Sanjeev Mahajan and Accused no. 3/Petitioner- Dr. Manoj Khanna were the Principal Officers/Directors of the Accused no. 1/Company- M/s. Enhance Aesthetic & Cosmetics Studio Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., during the Financial Year 2017-18. Sh. Sanjeev was the wholetime director of the company and the Petitioner was the Managing Director. 3. It was stated that the Accused no. 1/Company is the holder of TAN No. DELE06583D and during the financial yea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved, the Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of the complaint case as well as the summoning order. 10. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has been wrongly summoned in the present case and the complaint along with the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are liable to be quashed. 11. He submits that the Accused No.2/Sanjeev Mahajan was the CEO and Director of the Company, and was solely responsible for managing affairs of the company and deducting and depositing TDS, which has been admitted by Accused No.2 in his contemporaneous replies placed on record. 12. He submits that the summons have been issued without appreciating that the Petitioner was not responsible for deduction of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court in Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330 held as under: - "29. The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 CrPC, at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far-reaching consequences inasmuch as it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is well-settled that while exercising the power under Section 528 of the BNSS (Section 482 of the CrPC) to quash a complaint at the pre-trial stage, it is pertinent for this Court to examine whether the factual defence is of such impeachable nature that the entire allegations made in the complaint is disproved. 20. At the stage of cognizance, the Court is required only to examine whether prima facie ingredients of the offence are disclosed, and not to enter into a detailed scrutiny of sufficiency or reliability of evidence. 21. In the present case, it is noteworthy that Section 276B criminalises failure to pay TDS deducted to the credit of the Central Government. The sanction order clearly records that tax was deducted but not deposit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the default and none has provided any reason for the actual cause of delay in the TDS deposits. 27. Hence, in view of the above, the veracity of the allegations raised by both the directors and the liability of the Petitioner, becomes purely a factual issue, which can only to be decided after due consideration of evidence at the time of trial. 28. It is also well-settled that subsequent payment does not obliterate criminal liability unless the statute so provides. The assessee cannot be granted immunity from prosecution merely on the ground that ultimately TDS was deposited in Govt. account albeit belatedly. 29. Further, Section 278B provides that every person who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of, and was re....