HC presumes culpable mental state on the part of accused & Confirms Prosecution for non filing of Return

It would be for the respondent to establish during the trial that her failure to file her return was not wilful. The Courts below went wrong in going into the question as to whether the explanation offered by the respondent in response to the show cause notice given to her before the filing of the complaint in Court was rightly rejected or not. Once the complaint stood filed the trial Court was only required to examine whether cognizance should be taken or not and once it was decided to take cognizance and to summon the respondent the trial Court thereafter was required to examine whether in the pre-charge evidence the complainant had been able to show that the respondent had not filed her return for the assessment year in question within the prescribed period, which fact in the present case was not even disputed by the respondent. So, after raising the presumption under Section 278-E the trial Court should have framed the charge against the respondent leaving it to him show during the trial thereafter that there was no wilful default on her part.

HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Crl. M.C. No. 2110/2010

Date of Decision: 13^th March, 2013

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Versus

NILOFAR CURRIMBHOY

CORAM:  HONORABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. BHASIN

ORDER

P.K. BHASIN, J: