INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. MUKESH KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Income-tax Officer, Jalandhar, filed a complaint under Section 276CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the respondent. THE Cheif Judicial Magistrate after examination of the evidence has found that "the complainant has utterly failed to prove on file that the notice exhibit P-3 under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act was ever served... upon the accused". Thus, the assessee was acquitted of the charge. Aggrieved by the order, the Revenue has filed this petition for the grant of leave to appeal.

(2.) MR. Sawhney, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the departmental authorities had held the respondent-assessee guilty of delay in filing the return. A penalty had been imposed. The order had attained finality. Thus, the court could not have gone into the question of service of the notice.

(3.) MR. Sawhney contends that the findings recorded by the Revenue were binding on the trial court. Is it so ?