Nagendra Choudhary Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
Rajasthan High Court held that criminal prosecution wholly on allegation of concealment is liable to be quashed since the Tribunal has adjudicated that there was neither concealment during penalty proceedings hence there remains no factual or legal basis for the prosecution to survive.
Facts- The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising from Criminal Case No. 140/2017 pending before the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur City, Jaipur for alleged offence under Section 276C(1)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Notably, during the pendency of search proceedings, the Department initiated prosecution by way of filing complaint on 31.03.2017 under Section 276C(1)(i) of the Act of 1961 alleging willful attempt to evade tax by the petitioner.
Conclusion- It is also significant factor that while penalty and prosecution are theoretically independent, this independence exists only in terms of procedure, not in terms of factual foundation. One cannot survive without the other, if both are based on identical facts and those facts are judicially negated.
It is also settled preposition of law that the criminal prosecution requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. When the ITAT, while applying even the principle of preponderance of evidence, found no concealment, then the higher criminal standard cannot possibly be achieved. This Court finds that the prosecution against the petitioner under Section 276C(1)(i) of the Act of 1961 is premised wholly on allegations of concealment. Since the Tribunal has adjudicated, based on merits, that there was neither concealment, nor satisfaction of requirements for penalty, there remains no factual or legal basis for the prosecution to survive.
