This article examines several significant court rulings concerning various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961, particularly those related to tax evasion and offences. It covers cases dealing with wilful attempts to evade tax, failure to produce documents, making false statements, prosecution procedures, and the voiding of asset transfers during tax proceedings. The decisions highlight the courts' interpretations of these sections and their implications for taxpayers.
CASE 1
Kalluri Krishan Pushkar v. Dy. CIT (2016) 236 Taxman 27 / 135 DTR 351 (AP T)(HC)
Section 276C(1) in The Income- Tax Act, 1995
(1) If a person wilfully attempts in any manner whatsoever to evade any tax, penalty, or interest chargeable or imposable under this Act, he shall, without pr
Daily Limit Reached
You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Articles
Subscribe to
CCI PRO
for unlimited access
Why Upgrade to
CCI PRO?
-
No Ads
-
WhatsApp Broadcasts
-
Daily E-Newsletter
-
Unlimited Articles Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits
Already a PRO member?
Login here
for an ad-free experience.
FAQ :
Under Section 276C(1), if a person wilfully attempts to evade tax, penalty, or interest exceeding one lakh rupees, they face rigorous imprisonment of at least six months, extendable up to seven years, and a fine. For other cases, the imprisonment is at least three months, extendable up to three years, with a fine.
No, the pendency of an appeal before an appellate authority does not prevent the initiation of prosecution proceedings. This was clarified in the Pradip Burman v. ITO case.
A transfer of assets made by an assessee during or after tax proceedings, but before a notice under Rule 2 of the Second Schedule, is void against tax claims. However, this is not the case if the transfer was for adequate consideration without notice of the proceedings, or if it had prior permission from the Assessing Officer.
No, a conviction by a Criminal Court does not automatically make an application for compounding of an offence non-maintainable. The competent authority must still examine the merits of the case for compounding.
Section 279 states that a person cannot be prosecuted for certain offences under the Income Tax Act without the previous sanction of the Commissioner, Commissioner (Appeals), or the appropriate authority.
Section 276D penalises wilful failure to produce accounts and documents as required by a notice under Section 142(1) or to comply with a direction under Section 142(2A). Penalties include rigorous imprisonment or a fine.