HARDAYAL SINGH Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed by the accused- petitioners under Sections 401/482 Cr.P.C., seeking quashment of the criminal complaint under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, copy Annexure P-1 and also quashing the order dated 19.1.1990 copy Annexure P-3 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, vide which order dated 22.5.1989 copy Annexure P-2 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate discharging the accused was set aside and the case was ordered to be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate for further inquiry into the matter.

(2.) THE facts which are relevant for the decision of the present petition are that the Income Tax Officer filed a complaint for the offence under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused-petitioners and others. It was alleged that M/s Vishkarma Motors, accused No. 1 was a partnership concern of which accused Nos. 2 to 4, namely, Hardayal Singh, Rakha Singh and Smt. Punna Devi were the partners having the share to the extent of 1/3 each. It was alleged that the accused submitted Income Tax Return for the assessment year 1973-74 on 18.7.1973 and that the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act on 10.9.1973. It was alleged that subsequently, the Income Tax Officer impounded certain books of accounts relating to the assessment year 1973-74 and notice under Section 31 of the Income Tax Act was served on accused No. 1. It was alleged that on the basis of the information collected, the Income Tax Officer served notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act upon accused Nos. 2 and 3 for re-opening the assessment for the assessment year 1973-74. It was alleged that after perusing the account books and other material, the Income Tax Officer made re-assessment on 12.3.1980. It was alleged that against the said re-assessment, the accused filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax and thereupon the assessment order dated 12.3.1980 was set aside by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on 7.1.1983 and the Income Tax Officer was directed to pass fresh order after hearing the assessee. Thereafter, the Income Tax Officer passed fresh order of assessment dated 19.3.1984 and a penalty notice under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for concealment of income was also issued. It was alleged that the accused had knowingly made wrong verification on the Income Tax Return, declaring the income at a lower figure and further delivered knowingly wrong accounts and false statements of account believing the same to be false and did not believe the same to be true and as such had committed the offence punishable under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act. It was alleged that accused Nos. 2 to 4 had been arrayed as accused being responsible to the conduct of the business of the firm.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties in detail and have gone through the record carefully.