TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1208
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5.06.2001. He also held the additional charge of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Tamil Nadu-IV, during the leave period of the regular Commissioner of Income Tax, from 18.12.2000 to 07.01.2001. 4. The 2nd Accused, who is the Appellant in Crl.A.No.792 of 2017, was appointed as a Director of M/s. IGGI Resorts International Limited. The said Company was originally incorporated as a Private Limited Company on 24.03.1988 and subsequently became a Public Limited Company on 28.09.1992. The promoters of the Company were Mr.Ignatius and Mrs.Carmel Shantha Ignatius, who are husband and wife and were also members of the Board of Directors of the said Company. 5. The 3rd Accused, who is the Appellant in Crl.A.No.788 of 2017, was a Director of M/s.Maxworth Country (India) Private Limited. The 4th Accused was a Licensed Engineer, while the 5th Accused was also a Director of M/s.IGGI Resorts International Limited. Further, M/s.IGGI Resorts International Limited was assessed under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and was liable to pay income tax amounting to Rs. 71,49,687/-, together with applicable interest. 6. Pursuant to the same, on 31.05.2000, the Assessing Officer issued ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the purpose of selling the said properties to M/s.MGM Entertainment Private Limited. 11. Therefore, the 2nd Accused had full knowledge that the said properties were under attachment towards the tax arrears. However, the application submitted by the 2nd Accused was rejected on the ground that M/s.IGGI Resorts International Limited had substantial outstanding tax arrears. The said fact was also intimated to M/s.IGGI Resorts International Limited. Consequently, the Certificate under Section 230A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was not issued, and the Company was thereby precluded from effecting the sale of the said properties. 12. It is the case of the prosecution that all the accused persons, in furtherance of their criminal conspiracy, acted in concert with an intention to cheat the Income Tax Department and fraudulently and dishonestly induced the Income Tax Department to issue a Certificate under Section 230A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thereby enabling the disposal of the said properties. 13. Therefore, the Accused were charged for the offences punishable under Section 120-B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....handed over the said documents without the knowledge or consent of the Board of Directors of M/s.Maxworth Country (India) Private Limited. On contrary, Ex.P244 clearly reveals that the decision to hand over the original title documents relating to the properties situated at Kodaikanal was taken jointly and was not an individual decision of the 3rd Accused. Hence, Ex.P244 is a letter issued in his capacity as a Director of M/s.Maxworth Country (India) Private Limited, and there is no contrary evidence on record to establish otherwise. 20. Therefore, it is submitted that the Trial Court ought to have held that the documents in question were merely transferred from one legal entity to another and that the 3rd Accused had acted only in his capacity as a representative and Director of M/s.Maxworth Country (India) Private Limited. It is further submitted that the other Directors of the said Company were neither arrayed as accused nor examined as witnesses by the prosecution. 21. He further submitted that the mere attestation of the xerox copies of the Sale Deeds, marked as Exs.P125 and P126, does not, by itself, establish any intention on the part of the 3rd Accused. It is submitte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... adducing cogent oral and documentary evidence, and that the Trial Court had rightly convicted them. He further submitted that, though the 1st and 4th Accused were acquitted by the Trial Court, their cases stand on a different footing, and the benefit arising out of their respective defences cannot automatically be extended to the convicted Accused. Therefore, he submitted that there is no warrant for interference with the conviction and sentence imposed by the Trial Court. 26. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellant in Crl.A.No.788 of 2017, the learned counsel appearing for the Appellant in Crl.A.No.792 of 2017, and the learned Special Public Prosecutor (CBI Cases) appearing for the Respondent. 27. According to the case of the prosecution, the Accused had conspired together during the year 2000-2001 with an intention to defraud the Income Tax Department. The 2nd Accused and the deceased Karthikeyan were Directors of M/s.IGGI Resorts International Limited and, in furtherance of the said conspiracy, had allegedly fraudulently and dishonestly induced the Income Tax Department to issue a Certificate under Section 230A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thereby ena....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. A3 is not found as accused in the FIR. As per Ex.243 I have received Ex.P.244. The names of persons who discussed the matter on behalf of the companies with regard to offering of the title deeds is not specifically mentioned in Ex.P.244. Production of title deeds before the Income Tax Office is not mentioned in Ex.P.244. IGGI Resorts International Ltd did not inform Maxworth Country India Ltd in writing before furnishing the sale deeds to the Income Tax Department. There is no record to show that IGGI Resorts International Ltd paid any amount to Maxworth Country India Ltd in respect of these title deeds. I did not collect the memorandum of association or article of association pertains to Maxworth Country India Ltd. I did not collect any books of accounts pertains to IGGI Resorts International Ltd and Maxworth Country India Ltd. My investigation reveals that Maxworth Country India Ltd is dealing with many companies during that period. My investigation reveals that during 1994- 1995 and till 1997 Shri R.Subramaniam was the Chairman and Managing Director of Maxworth Country India Ltd. My investigation also reveal that many individuals have given power of attorney to the Maxworth C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the requisite loss or harm. 36. Whereas, in the case on hand, there is no material to establish that the Appellants made any dishonest or fraudulent representation while seeking the Certificate under Section 230A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, the essential ingredients constituting the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, have not been established against the Appellants. In the absence of any evidence of fraudulent or dishonest inducement, the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is not made out against the Appellants. 37. Insofar as the offence under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, is concerned, the same cannot be established merely on the basis of suspicion, association or a mere relationship between the Accused persons. The prosecution is required to prove the existence of an agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or to commit an act which is not illegal by illegal means. Mere association or circumstances giving rise to suspicion, in the absence of cogent evidence establishing such an agreement, would not be sufficient to constitute the offence of criminal conspiracy. 38.....