SURJIT ENGINEERING WORKS Vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing the complaint, annexure P -1, and consequent proceedings taken on the said complaint by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda, the order dated February 26, 1990, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the order dated March 18, 1993, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, in a revision petition against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

(2.) THE Income -tax Officer, Faridkot, filed a complaint against the petitioners under Section 276C read with Section 277 of the Income -tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"). On the basis of the pre -charge evidence led by the complainant, the petitioners were charge -sheeted under the abovesaid provisions on July 21, 1989, for making false entries in the account books and also for making false verification regarding the stocks so as to evade income -tax. The case was thereafter adjourned for evidence of the complainant. On December 6, 1989, the petitioners filed an application before the trial court stating that since discrepancies to the tune of Rs. 59,485 in the stock of the petitioner -firm, on the basis of which the prosecution was launched against the petitioners, had been set aside by the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals), Bathinda, vide order dated October 3, 1989, the complaint against the petitioners could no longer proceed and the proceedings be dropped.

(3.) THE petitioners are being prosecuted under Sections 276C and 277 of the Act for allegedly introducing a false entry of Rs. 50,000 in the account books of the petitioner -firm with the intention of evading income -tax liability and also for making false verification of the stock of the petitioner -firm relating to the financial year 1976 -77. It has been submitted that in the order of the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals) dated October 3, 1989, the contention of the Department regarding the false verification of the stock to the tune of Rs. 39,485 has not been upheld by the appellate authority. In other words, the petitioners claim that the charge framed under Section 277 of the Act against them for not making proper verification of stocks is not legally maintainable in view of the order of the appellate authority. The complainant has stated in the reply that the Department has filed a second appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the matter is still sub judice in the Tribunal and, therefore, the application for dropping the criminal proceedings was not tenable. After hearing counsel for the parties, the trial court held that even if the order passed by the appellate authority be taken at its face value, the same did not in any way absolve the petitioners of their liability under Section 276C of the Act for allegedly making a false entry in the account books of the firm for evading income -tax liability. It was further held by the trial court that the effect of the appellate order dated October 3, 1989, would be seen when the case is finally disposed of and the application filed by the petitioners was dismissed. The petitioners' revision petition against the order of the trial court was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, on March 18, 1993.