Mrs.jayashree v. The Income Tax Officernon-Corporate Ward – 11(4)Kanmani Buildingno.611, Anna Salaichennai – 600 006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Crl.O.P.No.3252 of 2017andCrl.M.P.Nos.2346 and 2347 of 2017 Mrs.Jayashree... Petitioner/Accused Vs The Income Tax OfficerNon-Corporate Ward – 11(4)Kanmani BuildingNo.611, Anna SalaiChennai – 600 006.... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 ofCr.P.C, praying to call for the entire records in EOCC No.161 of2016 on the file of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,Egmore (E.O-II), Allikulam Road, Chennai and quash all furtherproceeding against the accused. For Petitioner : Mr.P.RameshkumarFor Respondent : Mr.L.Murali Krishnan Special Public ProsecutorIT CasesORDER This petition has been filed to quash all furtherproceedings in EOCC No.161 of 2016 on the file of AdditionalChief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore (E.O-II), Allikulam Road,Chennai, as against the petitioner/accused. 2.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner wouldsubmit that the respondent has filed a complaint against thepetitioner for the offence under Section 276 CC of Income TaxAct alleging that the accused during the assessment year 2013-2014 sold a property for a sum of Rs.1,05,60,000/- (Rupees OneCrore Five Lakhs and Sixty Thousand only) and against which, she purchased immovable property for a sum of Rs.1,55,00,000/- (OneCrore and Fifty Five Lakhs only) but failed to file her returnof income for the assessment year 2013-2014 and even after therespondent/complainant issued a notice on 06.07.2015 and againon 26.04.2016, calling upon the petitioner/accused to file herreturn of income, she failed to file her return of income andhence, a show cause notice was issued on 29.04.2016 and uponreceipt of the same, the petitioner/accused submitted her returnon 24.05.2016 stating that she had reinvested the entire saleconsideration in a residential property and therefore, theincome was exempted from tax under Section 54 F of the IncomeTax Act and there was no taxable income. However, therespondent/complainant has filed the present complaint for non-filing of return by the petitioner/accused alleging that inspiteof the exemption, it was obligatory on the part of thepetitioner/accused to file return of income and then claimexemption. Hence the petitioner/accused has filed this petitionto quash all further proceedings in EOCC No.161 of 2016. 3.The learned Special Public Prosecutor would submitthat the trial has already been commenced and some of theprosecution witnesses have already been examined and the case isposted for further evidence on the side of the prosecution. 4. Heard Mr.P.Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing forthe petitioner and Mr.L.Murali Krishnan, learned Special PublicProsecutor appearing for the respondent.5. It is relevant to rely upon the judgment of theHon'ble Supreme Court of India passed in Crl.A.No.579 of 2019dated 02.04.2019 in the case of Devendra Prasad Singh Vs. Stateof Bihar & Anr., as follows:-" 12.So far as the second groundis concerned, we are of the view that theHigh Court while hearing the applicationunder Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. had nojurisdiction to appreciate the statement ofthe witnesses and record a finding thatthere were inconsistencies in theirstatements and, therefore, there was noprima facie case made out againstrespondent No.2. In our view, this could bedone only in the trial while deciding theissues on the merits or/and by theAppellate Court while deciding the appealarising out of the final order passed bythe Trial Court but not in Section 482Cr.P.C. proceedings. 13.In view of the foregoingdiscussion, we allow the appeal, set asidethe impugned order and restore theaforementioned complaint case to itsoriginal file for being proceeded with onmerits in accordance with law. 13.In view of the foregoingdiscussion, we allow the appeal, set asidethe impugned order and restore theaforementioned complaint case to itsoriginal file for being proceeded with onmerits in accordance with law. 6.Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India dealingin respect of the very same issue in Crl.A.No.1572 of 2019 dated17.10.2019 in the case of Central Bureau of Invstigation Vs.Arvind Khanna, wherein, it has been held as follows: “19. After perusing the impugned orderand on hearing the submissions made by thelearned senior counsels on both sides, we areof the view that the impugned order passed bythe High Court is not sustainable. In apetition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,the High Court has recorded findings onseveral disputed facts and allowed thepetition. Defence of the accused is to betested after appreciating the evidence duringtrial. The very fact that the High Court, inthis case, went into the most minute details,on the allegations made by the appellant-C.B.I., and the defence put-forth by therespondent, led us to a conclusion that theHigh Court has exceeded its power, whileexercising its inherent jurisdiction underSection 482 Cr.P.C. 20. In our view, the assessment made bythe High Court at this stage, when the matterhas been taken cognizance by the CompetentCourt, is completely incorrect and uncalledfor.” 7.Further the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India also heldin the order dated 02.12.2019 in Crl.A.No.1817 of 2019 in thecase of M.Jayanthi Vs. K.R.Meenakshi & anr, as follows: "9. It is too late in the day to seekreference to any authority for theproposition that while invoking the powerunder Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing acomplaint or a charge, the Court should notembark upon an enquiry into the validity ofthe evidence available. All that the Courtshould see is as to whether there areallegations in the complaint which form the 3 basis for the ingredients that constitutecertain offences complained of. The Court mayalso be entitled to see (i) whether thepreconditions requisite for taking cognizancehave been complied with or not; and (ii)whether the allegations contained in thecomplaint, even if accepted in entirety,would not constitute the offence alleged. .............. 13. A look at the complaint filed by theappellant would show that the appellant hadincorporated the ingredients necessary forprosecuting the respondents for the offencesalleged. The question whether the appellantwill be able to prove the allegations in amanner known to law would arise only at alater stage...................."The above judgments are squarely applicable to this case and assuch, the points raised by the petitioner cannot be consideredby this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 8.In view of the above discussion, the quash petitioncannot be entertained at this stage and this Court is notinclined to quash the proceedings in EOCC No.161 of 2016 on thefile of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore (E.O-II), Allikulam Road, Chennai. The petitioner is at liberty toraise all the grounds before the trial Court. The personalappearance of the petitioner is dispensed with and she shall berepresented by a counsel after filing appropriate application.However, the petitioner shall be present before the Court at thetime of furnishing of copies, framing charges, questioning underSection 313 Cr.P.C. and at the time of passing judgment.However, considering that the EOCC is of the year 2016, thetrial Court is directed to complete the trial within a period ofsix months from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. 9. Accordingly, this criminal original petition isdismissed. Crl.M.P.No.2346 of 2017 is closed and Crl.M.P.No.2347of 2017 is disposed of with the above directions. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mra 4 To 9. Accordingly, this criminal original petition isdismissed. Crl.M.P.No.2346 of 2017 is closed and Crl.M.P.No.2347of 2017 is disposed of with the above directions. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mra 4 To 1.The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore (E.O-II), Allikulam Road, Chennai 2.The SpecialPublic Prosecutor, for ITI Cases, High Court, Madras. 3. The Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward-11(4)Kanmani Building, No.611, Anna Salai, Chennai-6. AK(CO)CB(21/09/2020) Crl.O.P.No.3252 of 2017andCrl.M.P.Nos.2346 and 2347 of 2017