Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

the court can impose the sentence of fine on a company

Raj Kumar Makkad ,
  11 March 2010       Share Bookmark

Court :
Bombay High Court
Brief :
Direct Taxation - Offence by Companies - Willful attempt to evade tax - Concealment of taxable income - Section 276C and Section 278B of Income Tax Act - Trial Court issued process against Applicant-accused on a complaint by Respondents that Applicant-accused, partners of impugned firm, concealed taxable income and made bogus claim of remission/rebate - Hence, present application - Whether Applicants can be punished for offence by firm?
Citation :
Suresh Anandraj Jain, Sau Ujwala Paraschand Jain and Tatiya Credit Corporation v. Union of India (UOI) through B.T. Pali (Decided on 11.02.2010) MANU/MH/0100/2010
Held, the company being a juristic person cannot be prosecuted for the offence for which custodial sentence is the mandatory punishment. But when custodial sentence and fine are the prescribed mode of punishment, the court can impose the sentence of fine on a company which is found guilty as the sentence of imprisonment is impossible to be carried out. It is an acceptable legal maxim that law does not compel a man to do that which cannot possibly be performed. In the present case, whether the Applicants can be punished Under Section 276C for the offence committed Under Section 278B by the firm or not can be considered after trial and after giving opportunity to both the sides to lead the evidence. Applications dismissed.

 
"Loved reading this piece by Raj Kumar Makkad?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Taxation
Views : 1023




Comments





Latest Judgments


More »