Category: Trial Court
Income Tax Prosecution u/s 276CC discharge of accused denied by Trial Court since plea of accused u/s 251 CrPC had been recorded and recording of evidence already commenced ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2652 (2018) (11) AC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon: Subramanium Sethuraman V. State of Maharashtra: …
Release of convicts prosecuted under Income Tax Act on probation- Special Judge dismiss Revenue’s appeal delay condonation application for casual approach ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2574 (2018) (10) AC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties: Mohd. Hasim Vs State of UP State of Nagaland Vs.Lipok …
Prosecution u/s 277 if grave suspicion exists about involvement of the accused, it is expected to frame charge and put the accused on trial ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2451 (2018) 08 AC The instant revision petition was directed against the order passed by Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate …
Prosecution under section 276B – Name appearing in Traces module would not make accountant a director or principal officer u/s 2 (35) of Income Tax Act. To invoke Section 276B mere fact that accused was working in accounts department would not mean that he automatically becomes person liable …
Prosecution against accountant u/s 276 B for delay in deposit of TDS quashed. The Court asked why instead of treating directors as principal officers the Income Tax Department was hell-bent in prosecuting its small-time employee. The Court warned the ITO that false deposition can make him face criminal …
Prosecution u/s 276C for late deposit of self assessment tax. Late deposit of tax after the expiry of stipulated period would not wipe out the offence The instant revision petition had been filed before the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) against the order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, (CJM/Trial …
Income Tax Prosecution for not disclosing foreign bank accounts. Special Judge rejects petition for Joint Trial in all complaints u/s 276C and 277 ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2292 (2018) (04) AC In the instant case, the petitioner husband and wife (collectively called “accused”) had filed revision petitions …
Prosecution for violation u/s 139(1) and 142(1) quashed as penalty u/s 271F was deleted by CIT(A) and no adjudicatory proceedings were initiated u/s 142(1) ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2287 (2018) (04) AC Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties K.C. Builders & Anr. Vs The Assistant …
No immunity from prosecution of offences undergoing trial before application to Income Tax Settlement Commission in view of the proviso to Section 245H(1) ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2283 (2018) (04) TC The petitioners in the instant revision petitions had been facing trial before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate …
Prosecution u/s 276B of directors as Principal Officer upheld as they failed to disclose who was managing the affairs of the company ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2282 (2018) (04) TC The instant judgment was made in a revision petition filed by the defaulting company and its principal …
