Cruelty Need Not Be Physical: Mental Agony and Emotional Distress Are Sufficient Grounds for Divorce: Supreme Court Section 195 Cr.P.C. | Tribunals Are Not Courts: Private Complaints for Offences Like False Evidence Valid: Supreme Court Limitation | Right to Appeal Is Fundamental, Especially When Liberty Is at Stake: Supreme Court Condones 1637-Day Delay FIR Quashed | No Mens Rea, No Crime: Supreme Court Emphasizes Protection of Public Servants Acting in Good Faith Trademark | Passing Off Rights Trump Registration Rights: Delhi High Court A Minor Procedural Delay Should Not Disqualify Advances as Export Credit When Exports Are Fulfilled on Time: Bombay HC Preventive Detention Must Be Based on Relevant and Proximate Material: J&K High Court Terrorism Stems From Hateful Thoughts, Not Physical Abilities: Madhya Pradesh High Court Denies Bail of Alleged ISIS Conspiracy Forwarding Offensive Content Equals Liability: Madras High Court Upholds Conviction for Derogatory Social Media Post Against Women Journalists Absence of Receipts No Barrier to Justice: Madras High Court Orders Theft Complaint Referral Under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C Rajasthan High Court Emphasizes Rehabilitation, Grants Probation to 67-Year-Old Convicted of Kidnapping" P&H High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition Against Advocate Renuka Chopra: “A Frustrated Outburst Amid Systemic Challenges” Kerala High Court Criticizes Irregularities in Sabarimala Melsanthi Selection, Orders Compliance with Guidelines Non-Payment of Rent Does Not Constitute Criminal Breach of Trust: Calcutta High Court Administrative Orders Cannot Override Terminated Contracts: Rajasthan High Court Affirms in Landmark Decision Minimum Wage Claims Must Be Resolved by Designated Authorities Under the Minimum Wages Act, Not the Labour Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court Madras High Court Confirms Equal Coparcenary Rights for Daughters, Emphasizes Ancestral Property Rights

Delayed Tax Payment Does Not Amount to Evasion: Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes Complaint Against

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a complaint and subsequent proceedings against M/S Hansa Metallics Limited and its directors, emphasizing that a delayed payment of tax, accompanied by interest, does not constitute tax evasion.

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, presiding over the matter, observed, "The only question that remains is as to whether delayed payment along with the interest could be termed as evasion of tax for which the complaint in question has been filed." The Court answered this in the negative, providing relief to the petitioners who were facing prosecution under Sections 276C and 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The case, CRM-M-43841-2018, revolved around a complaint filed against the company and its directors for the alleged evasion of tax in the Assessment Year 2012-13. While the company admitted to a delay in tax payment, it argued that the amount, along with the due interest, was eventually paid and that this did not amount to willful evasion of tax.

In his ruling, Justice Bedi referred to various precedents, including the Karnataka High Court's judgment in Confident Projects (India) (P.) Ltd. Versus Income Tax Department and the Madras High Court's decision in S.P. Velayutham's case. These judgments collectively underscored the principle that the delay in tax payment, when followed by eventual payment and interest, does not equate to evasion.

"Delayed payment of Income Tax would not amount to evasion of tax, so long as there is payment of tax," Justice Bedi quoted from a precedent, reiterating this position in the Court's decision.

Date of Decision: 22.01.2024

M/S HANSA METALLICS LIMITED & OTHERS VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

 

Similar News