NARAYANAN P K Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE cases came before the Division Bench on the basis of a reference made by one of us (Thulasidas J.) doubting the correctness of the decision reported in Premier Breweries v. Dy. CIT [1994] 207 ITR 871 ; [1994] KLJ (TC) 143 and for an authoritative pronouncement on the subject.

(2.) THESE applications are filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the criminal complaints filed by the second respondent alleging that the common petitioner has committed an offence punishable under Sections 276C(1)(i) and 277(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Copy of the complaint is produced as annexure "A" to these petitions.

(3.) RELIANCE was placed on a few decisions of this court in Madras Spinners Ltd v. Dy. CIT (Assessment) [19931 203 ITR 282 ; V. Rajasekharan Nair v. CIT [1993] 204 ITR 783 ; Premier Breweries Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1994] 207 ITR 871 and Vanaja Textiles Ltd. v. IAC of I. T. [1994] 208 ITR 602 for canvassing the position that when the appellate authority has set aside the penalty proceedings initiated by the Income-tax Department, a prosecution on the very same set of facts will not be maintainable and it has to be quashed. The decision of the Supreme Court in Uttam Chand v. ITO [1982] 133 ITR 909 also is pressed into service by the petitioner. Basing on Uttam Chand's case [1982] 133 ITR 909 (SC), counsel for the petitioner argued that the prosecution pending against the petitioner is a mere abuse of the process of the court and judicial time should not allowed to be wasted on meaningless litigation. The basis of the prosecution is totally nullified in view of the appellate orders, contends counsel.