- (1.) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the criminal complaint titled as "Income Tax Officer, Ward II(I), Ludhiana v. Ambika Agro Engineers and Ors. filed under Section 276/277 read with Section 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the assessment year 1993-94 and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom and pending in the Court of C.J.M., Ludhiana.
(2.) The aforesaid complaint was filed on 22.2.2001 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward II(I), Ludhiana against the petitioners on the ground that the accused firm had filed its return of income for the assessment year 1993-94 on 31.10.1993. In the regular assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer found that the assessee had concealed income. He framed assessment under Section 143(2) of the Act and assessed income at Rs. 66,098/- as against the declared income of Rs. 6,150/-. The Assessing Officer also imposed penalty of Rs. 21,520/- on the assessee under Section 27(1)(c) of the Act vide order dated 9.7.1999 for filing false return with inaccurate particulars of income.
(3.) Against the order of penalty, the assessee firm filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ludhiana. The said appeal was allowed and the order of penalty was set aside vide order dated 28.3.2000 while observing as under: It is seen from the penalty order itself that the appellant during the course of penalty proceedings had argued that there may have been difference in the stock statements submitted to the Bank but all the purchases made and sales effected have duly been accounted for in the books of account. The A.O. could not give any finding against this argument of the appellant and he simply relied on the stock statements submitted to the Bank. The appellant has placed before me entire material regarding the purchase of steel pins that is purchase bill, copies of ledger account where these purchases have been entered in the books of account. Copies of various parties to whom sales were made against this purchase and from this material it can be seen that the purchase had been properly vouched and accounted for in its book of account. Under these circumstances it is held that the A.O. had erred in the levying penalty under Section 27(1)(c) amount to Rs. 21,520/- and the same is deleted.;