2026 (7) TMI 1495

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....017, pending before the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences) Jaipur Metropolitan for the offence punishable under Sections 276C(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'IT Act'). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a search under Section 132 of the IT Act, was carried out in the premises of the petitioner, wherein certain documents were seized and thereafter, two separate of proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. One for imposing penalty for the undisclosed income and other by way of filing a complaint against the petitioner before the Court below. 3. Counsel submits that the order of penalty imposed by the Income Tax Department was assailed by the petitioner by way filing an appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... court, where continuation would be unjust or contrary to statutory scheme. To allow continued prosecution in such circumstances would sanction an unjust, oppressive and abusive process, contrary to the constitutional guarantee of fairness and the very purpose of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The only logical conclusion is to quash the prosecution, while preserving the Department's liberty to seek revival, if the Tribunal's exoneration is reversed in the pending appeal. 35. In view of the above findings, this Court holds that the continuation of criminal proceedings under Section 276(C)(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the petitioner would amount to an abuse of the process of law. The prosecution is untenabl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd the instant petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be rejected. 6. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Division Bench of this Court has not passed any interim order staying the operation of the order dated 23.09.2019, passed by the ITAT. Hence, under these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to get the relief as sought in the instant petition. 7. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on the record. 8. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the fact that the controversy involved in the instant petition has already been set at rest by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Nagendr....