M/s Goyal Trading Company v. Chowk Bazar, Jwalapur
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
In view of the above the revision is allowed and the
Provisions considered
Judgment
Union of India, through Sri Ranjeet Singh Income Tax Officer, Haridwar Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Kanpur … Opp. Parties
3. 4.
Operative part
2. Hon’ble M.M.Ghildiyal, J. This revision is filed against the order dated 28.04.1989 whereby the accused has been summoned by Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Kanpur in criminal complaint no. 217 of 1989. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned A.G.A. and Sri S.K. Posti on behalf of respondents. The complaint was filed under section 276 DD read with section 278-B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with the allegations that the revisionists, one partner of the firm M/s Goyal Trading Company accepted the deposit of Rs. 23,000/- in violation of section 269 SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 from Sri Surendra Kumar of Dhampur District Bijnor and thereby contravened the provision of section 269 SS of Income Tax Act, 1961. Learned counsel for the petitioners cited the decision of the Apex Court in the mater of Gendral Finance Co. and another Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, 2002 Income Tax Reports 338 in support of the contention that section 276 DD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was omitted from the Income Tax Act 1961 w.e.f. April 1, 1989 and even if the offence committed before the omission of the 276 DD the criminal proceedings cannot continued thereafter. The facts of the reported case are similar to the facts of the instant case and, therefore, the principle squarely applies to the instant case and the proceedings against the petitioner cannot, therefore, legally continued. In view of the above the revision is allowed and the proceedings arising out of criminal case no. 217 of 1989 Union of India Vs. M/s Goyal Trading Company and others in the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Kanpur are hereby quashed. March 24, 2004 ASWAL (M.M.Ghildiyal, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above the revision is allowed and the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Income Tax Act, 1961.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Uttarakhand High Court, on 24 Mar 2004. The bench was M M GHILDIYAL.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.