This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
If the prosecution proves its case on basis of evidence and the same is also supported by the implied admission of the accused, the conviction of the accused under s 276C(1), 277 and 278 is not liable to be interfered with on the ground that the return did not bear his signature and was not filed by him
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- ITO Vs Mangat Ram Norata Ram Narwana and Anr. (Supreme Court of India)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- Supreme Court of India
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
ITO Vs Mangat Ram Norata Ram Narwana and Anr.
Supreme Court of India
Criminal Appeal No(s). 8 of 2005
Decided on: 5 May 2011
Order
1. The Income Tax Officer, aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondents has preferred this appeal with leave of the Court. According to the prosecution, respondent no.1 M/s. Mangat Ram Norata Ram is a partnership firm carrying on the business of sale and purchase of machinery, iron pipes and spare parts. Respondent No. 2 accused Hem Raj happened to be one of its partner. M/s. Mangat Ram Norata Ram (hereinafter referred to as “the Firm”) filed its in...
