ITO Vs Qamruddin (Allahabad High Court)
The Income Tax Officer filed the present criminal appeal against the judgment dated 28.04.1982 whereby the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur, convicted the respondent under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act but released him under the Probation of Offenders Act. The prosecution arose from a complaint alleging that, in the return for Assessment Year 1968-69 filed on 26.10.1968, the firm had failed to disclose income of ₹1,15,470 received from M/s Damodar Das and others. During the proceedings, one of the partners died, and the case continued only against the surviving accused.
The accused admitted his guilt and stated that out of the disputed amount, ₹50,810 had been excluded pursuant to a High Court order, while tax and penalty had been paid on the remaining ₹61,460. The Income Tax Officer accepted these facts. The trial court also took into account that it was the accused’s first offence, his father’s death during the pendency of the proceedings, his admission of guilt, and his undertaking not to repeat such conduct, and consequently released him under the Probation of Offenders Act after recording conviction.
Before the High Court, the appellant contended that Section 292A of the Income Tax Act expressly bars the application of Section 360 Cr.P.C. and the Probation of Offenders Act to persons convicted under the Income Tax Act, unless the convicted person is below eighteen years of age. Reliance was placed on Union of India Vs. Mamta Sethi And Ors., wherein the Supreme Court held that Section 292A creates an express bar against granting probation for offences under the Income Tax Act and remitted the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration. The appellant also relied on Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Onkar Nath And Anr., where the Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that although probation should not have been granted in view of Section 292A, the sentence was not interfered with because of the long lapse of time and the peculiar facts of that case.
