RUCHI ASSOCIATES (P) LTD. and Another vs ASSTT. Commissioner of Income Tax

R.S. Sodhi, J.

Crl. M(M) 3200 of 2001 has been filed with a prayer for setting aside the order of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, dated 30-5-2001, in criminal complaint titled as S.P. Singh, Assistant Commissioner, Company Circle (1)1, New Delhi v. Ruchi Associates (P) Ltd. & Ors. The case of the petitioner is that an appeal was filed by the assessed, emanating from the order passed by the Commissioner, Delhi, on 5-12-1990, which related to the assessment year 1984-85. The assessing officer levied a penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, on account of certain discrepancies found in the closing stock, etc. The order of the assessing officer was confirmed by the first appellate authority which was taken up in appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 8-2-2001, set aside the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The penalty, having been set aside, no prosecution could be launched. Counsel relied upon judgment of the Supreme Court in G.L. Didwania and Another Vs. Income Tax Officer and Another, He further relies upon a judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Prithipal Singh and Co., which judgment has been approved by the Supreme Court. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent relies upon an order of the Supreme Court, dismissing SLP against a judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Ashok Biscuit Works and Others Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad, .

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. I am of the view that the view taken by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Prithipal Singh & Co. (supra) which has been approved by the Supreme Court holds good. In this view of the matter, I set aside the judgment and order of the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, dated 30-5-2001, and quash the complaint and all proceedings emanating there from.

Crl. Misc. (M) No. 3200 of 2001 is allowed.