M/S Singhania Oil Mills & Ors v. Union Of India & Anr

(1) DB SPECIAL APPEAL WRIT 673/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHANBENCH AT JAIPUR JUDGMENT D.B. SPECIAL APPEAL WRIT NO.673/2012 IN S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5072/2012 M/s SINGHANIA OIL MILLS & ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. DATE: 29.05.2012 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ARUN MISHRA'HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN-I Mr. Gunjan Pathak, for the appellants. **** Heard on the question of admission of intra Courtappeal. Order dated 16.04.2012 passed in Civil WritPetition No.5072/2012 has been impugned in the intra Courtappeal. Prayer was made before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offence), JaipurMetropolitan, Jaipur in Case No.969A/2006 to stay the criminalproceedings of a petition pending with effect from 2006, whichwas refused. It was submitted that proceedings are pendingbefore the Settlement Commission, as such there should bestay of criminal proceedings. It was further submitted that withrespect to penalty proceedings also, the matter is pending,therefore, criminal proceedings be stayed. No final order has been passed by the SettlementCommission. Final order is required to be passed by the (2) DB SPECIAL APPEAL WRIT 673/2012 Settlement Commission. So far, there is no immunity grantedby the Settlement Commission, as envisaged under Section245H of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 245H provides thatit is for the Settlement Commission to grant immunity fromprosecution and penalty. No such final order has been passed.Earlier order passed by the Settlement Commission has beenset aside by this Court. Reliance was placed by the Counsel appearing onbehalf of appellants on the decision of the Bombay High Courtin Bhupen Champaklal Dalal Vs. Sandeep Kapoor, [2001]248 ITR 0827, in which the Bombay High Court has laid downthat judicial notice can be taken by the Metropolitan Magistratewith respect to pendency of appeal. Reassessment orders werequestioned before the Appellate Tribunal, hence, proceedingswere stayed. Facts of present case are different. Reliance was also placed by the Counsel on thedecision of the Apex Court in Uttam Chand Vs. Income-taxOfficer, Central Circle, Amritsar, [1982] 133 ITR 0909.The decision of the Apex Court is entirely distinguishable asthe Apex Court has quashed the criminal proceedings on theground that it was not the case of filing false returns. It wasnot the case of interim stay. Thus, reliance placed by theCounsel on the aforesaid decision of the Apex Court is of noavail to the appellants. In our opinion, due to pendency of the proceedingsbefore the Settlement Commission, no immunity is available,only Settlement Commission can grant immunity fromprosecution. Criminal proceedings need not be stayed merely (3) DB SPECIAL APPEAL WRIT 673/2012 due to pendency of proceedings, order is discretionary. Noground is made out for making interference. Consequently, we do not find any ground so as to interfere in the orders passed by the Additional ChiefMetropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offence), JaipurMetropolitan, Jaipur as well as the Single Bench. The intra Court appeal is hereby dismissed. Stay application is also dismissed. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN-I),J. (ARUN MISHRA),CJ. /KKC/ Certificate: All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in thejudgment/order being emailed.KAMLESH KUMARP.A.