MAGDUM DUNDAPPA LOKAPPA V. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

CRL.P/100919/2016

AI Insights

The case involves Magdum Dundappa Lokappa and Suresh Sholapurmath, who filed a criminal petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash a private complaint filed by the Income Tax Department. The complaint alleged that the petitioners had tampered with a tax payment document, falsely declaring a tax payment of Rs. 1,465 instead of the actual Rs. 465 paid. The Income Tax Department accused them of offenses under Sections 276(C)(2) and 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which pertain to making false statements and declarations in tax documents. The petitioners argued that the error was due to a clerk's mistake and that prosecution was not warranted as the tax amount involved was less than Rs. 25,000, citing a circular that exempts such cases from prosecution. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that the circular does not apply to cases involving false declarations.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755365 (HC-KARNATAKA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Code of Criminal Procedure, Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHOK KULKARN
• Keywords: False Declaration; Income Tax; Monetary limit; Prosecution; Tampering of Document
• Section: 200; 482; 277; 276-C(2)

Judgement Text

": 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH ON THE 27th DAY OF OCTOBER 2016 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH CRIMINAL PETITION No.100919 of 2016 BETWEEN 1. MAGDUM DUNDAPPA LOKAPPA AGE:66 YEARS PROP. MALLIKARJUN CLINIC HOSPETH GALLI, GOKAK DIST. BELAGAVI 2. SURESH SHOLAPURMATH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AGE:62 YEARS COURT ROAD, GOKAK DIST. BELAGAVI ... PETITIONERS (By Sri ASHOK A KULKARNI, ADV.) AND INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT REPRESENTED BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER SHRI. ANGAD KUMAR AGED 37 YEARS, INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-I, GOKAK ... RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO QUASH THE PRIVATE COMPLAINT IN CC NO. 684 OF 2015 IN ANNEXURE-A PENDING BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE FIRST CLASS, GOKAK IN SO FAS AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED. : 2 : THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER A return income was filed by the first petitioner with the help of the second petitioner who is a chartered accountant. Taxable income of Rs.1,23,220/- was declared. Income tax liable to be paid was Rs.1,465/-. Tax of Rs.1,465/- was submitted to the department. On inquiry, it was found that only an amount of Rs.465/- was paid. That the document had been tampered by showing it as 1,465/-. Hence, a private complaint was filed by the income tax Department under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the offence punishable under Section 276(C)(2) and 277of the Income Tax Act. Seeking quashing of the proceedings, the present petition is filed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there is an error committed by the clerk of the Chartered accountant. Therefore, initiation of the proceedings is erroneous. He further contends that in terms of the circular, if there is an : 3 : attempt to evade tax of less than Rs.25, 000/-, no prosecution could be launched. Hence initiation of proceedings is an abuse of process of the law. 3. On hearing learned counsel, I’am of the considered view that there is no merit in this petition. The charges against the petitioner are in violation of Sections 276(C)(2) and 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 277 of the Income Tax Act would read that if any person makes a false statement, he would be liable for prosecution as narrated therein. 4. The contention of the petitioner is that the tax amount is less than Rs.25,000/- and therefore an attempt to evade tax is covered by the circular. Whether the amount involved is less than Rs.25,000/- or less is irrelevant. Section 277 deals with making a false declaration. Further, the allegation is that the document has been tampered by showing that he has paid the tax correctly. Whether the amount is covered by the circular or not becomes an irrelevant fact. The allegation that he has made a : 4 : false statement to the department is admitted. The contention is that it comes within the monetary limit. I’am unable to accept such a contention. The allegation is with regard to filing of a false declaration. Therefore, the provisions of law stand applicable and circular prescribing a monetary limit therefore would not be applicable to the case on hand. The question of evading the tax and the consequential monetary limit in launching the prosecution is an alien consideration. It is not a case of evading the tax. It is a case of furnishing of false declaration while submitting the return. Submission of a false declaration is quite different from evading the tax. The circular would therefore be applicable in case of evasion of tax. Under no grounds the circular could be read with regard to filing of a false declaration. Since the case pertains to a false declaration, the circular cannot come to the aid of the petitioners. Hence, I find no good ground to entertain the petition. The petition is rejected. Sd/- JUDGE kmv "