INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. TAURUS EQUIPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-C, Dhanbad, from an order of acquittal of the two respondents, M/s. Taurus Equipment (P.) Ltd. and its director, S.K. Agrawalla, dated 16th December, 1971. The two respondents were put on trial under Sections 276(b) and 276(d) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (briefly "the Act") for having failed to file the return for the financial year 1964-65, within the prescribed time limit as required by Section 206 of the Act read with Rule 35(1) of the I.T, Rules, 1962, and also for having failed to pay within the prescribed time the sum deducted as tax (Rs. 9,944.24) to the credit of the Central Government as required by Section 200 of the Act read with Rule 30(1)(b) of the said Rules. In short, the prosecution case was that the respondents had contravened the provisions of Sections 206 and 200 of the Act. The defence of the respondents was that they had not committed any offence. A further defence was taken by respondent No. 2, S.K. Agrawalla, that he was not the principal officer and he was, therefore, not liable to file the return under Section 206 of the Act.

(2.) IT is contended on behalf of the appellant that although evidence is lacking on the point that S.K. Agrawalla was the principal officer, there is allegation and evidence against the company to the effect that the company failed to pay the sum deducted as tax to the credit of the Central Government and hence the company should be held liable and should be punished. On behalf of the respondents, Mr. Rajgarhia raised a law point that in view of the provisions of Section 276 of the Act, it must be held that no offence was committed by the respondents. IT may be stated here that Section 276 has now been omitted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 (41 of 1975), (w.e.f. April 1, 1976). The portion relevant of Section 276 of the Act as it stood originally read as follows :