Rajesh Somandas Sachdev Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court heard a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of Criminal Complaint No. SW/535/2018 pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 38th Court, Ballard Pier, Mumbai, for an alleged offence under Section 276CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
The petitioner submitted that the income-tax return for Assessment Year 2014-15 was filed on 10 September 2018. Although the return had been filed pursuant to a notice under Section 148, the petitioner contended that the return disclosed entitlement to a refund of Rs. 1,64,340. It was argued that the case was covered by the proviso to Section 276CC, specifically clause (ii)(b), and reliance was placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court in Guru Nanak Enterprises vs. Income-tax Officer and the Madras High Court in Rajkumar Thiyagarajan vs. Income Tax Department, Madurai and Manav Menon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax.
The Revenue contended that the proviso to Section 276CC was applicable only to regular assessments and not to the present case, where the return had been filed only after issuance of a notice under Section 148 dated 18 September 2017 and after institution of criminal prosecution on 7 March 2018. The Revenue relied upon Sections 2(40), 143(3), 147, 148 and 276CC of the Income-tax Act and submitted that the offence under Section 276CC stood attracted because the petitioner had failed to furnish the return within the prescribed time. However, the Revenue fairly admitted that, as per the return filed by the petitioner and the Assessment Order dated 26 December 2018, the petitioner was entitled to a refund of Rs. 1,64,340.
