S.M. JAIN @ SHETAN MAL JAIN, SON OF LATE CHAMPALAL JAIN, RESIDENT OF LALPUR, P.O. & P.S. Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Sec. 482 of the Cr. P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.10.2001 passed by the learned I/C Special Judge, Economic Offence, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 37 of 2001, by which petitioner has been summoned after taking cognizance under Sec. 276-B of Income Tax Act and Sec. 278-B of Income Tax Act, and also under Sec. 409 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The complaint has been filed by the Union of India through Sebastian Kujur, Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-II, Ranchi (In-charge of T.D.S). It is alleged that all the accused persons were responsible for deductions of tax from the payments of the contractors, employees and others of HEC, Ltd. It is alleged that deduction of tax was made by HEC, Ltd. from the payment of the contractors, employees and others during the financial years 1995-96, and thereafter on several occasions the accused persons have not deposited the deducted tax, within the stipulated period under the Income Tax Act, with the authority. A notice to that effect was issued to the accused. As per the complaint, the accused persons submitted a reply stating therein that there was a delay in remitting the TDS, as HEC was a sick organization. The explanation was rejected by the complainant and a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000.00 was imposed under the Act. On this ground a complaint was filed alleging commission of offence under Sections 276-B read with Sec. 278 B of the Income Tax Act, and also under Sec. 409 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The learned Special Judge, Economics Offences, on receipt of the complaint, vide order dated 05.10.2001, had taken cognizance for offence under Sec. 276-B read with Sec. 278 B of the Income Tax Act, and also under Sec. 409 read with Sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons to the petitioner and others.