JAY FROZEN FOODS Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners who has been convicted by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences I) Egmore, Madras, in E. O. C. C. No. 629 of 1983 for offences under section 120B, 193, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and fine, which conviction have been confirmed in C. A. No. 328 of 1984 by the Principle Sessions Judge, Madras, with slight modification in the sentence relating to petitioners Nos. 2, 4 and 5, have filed the present revision challenging the convictions and sentences.

(2.) THE gravamen of the charge against the petitioners was that, though the third petitioner was not really a partner of the first petitioner-firm from April 1, 1977, onwards, all the petitioners conspired together for the purposed of getting the income-tax of the first petitioner assessed at a lower rate and made it appear as if the their petitioner continued to be a partner even after April 1, 1977, fabricated the partnership deed dated April 1, 1977, fabricated the day-book by omitting to enter the real profits due to petitioners Nos. 2 and 4, fabricated the ledger by showing false capital account and false current account, produced these false documents before the Income-tax officers and, on the basis of the misrepresentation contained in those documents, made the Income-tax Officers pass assessment orders for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 at reduced rate, delivered before the Income-tax Officers false returns and false statement, forged the signatures of the third petitioner in the registration deed and in the partnership deed, used the above forged documents as genuine, falsely made verification in the returns for the above years for continuing the registration that there was no change in the constitution of the firm, delivered these false verification before the Income-tax Officers and committed the above offence in pursuance of the conspiracy and made themselves liable for punishment under section 120B, 193, 196, 420, 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and section 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

(3.) IN appeal, the learned sessions judge confirmed the conviction, but modified the sentence of one year imprisonment on petitioners Nos. 2, 4 and 5 wherever it occurs, to imprisonment for a period of six months. This revision challenges the above conviction and sentence.