IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.17153 of 2009 1 PRANAB KUMAR SHAW 2 PRABIR KUMAR SHAW 3 PRAVAT KUMAR SHAW Versus UNION OF INDIA For the petitioners : - Sri Satyabir Bharti, Advocate For the Union of India : - Sri Harshwardhan Prasad, S.S.C., Income Tax Deptt. Sri Rishi Raj Sinha, J.S.C., Income Tax Deptt. ----------- 02/ 19.05.2009 Heard both the sides. The three petitioners were assesses under the Income Tax Act on account of being partners of a firm M/s National Trading Corporation and they were found evading taxes to the tune over Rs. 8,00,000/- (Eight lakhs), which has accumulated over Rs.29,00,000/- (Twenty Nine lakhs) on account of penalty and interests accruing thereon. Non- payment of taxes has resulted in filing of the Complaint Petition No. 247 (C) of 2008 before the Presiding Officer of Economic Offences Court, Patna and accordingly, the court has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 276C, 277 and 278B of the Income Tax Act. I have heard Sri Satyabir Bharti, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, who has relied mainly upon a decision rendered in the case of Prem Dass Vs, Income Tax Officer reported in 236 ITR 683 SC in which it has been - 2 - held that the offences being technical in nature and the assessment being made on presumptions, the same may not constitute an offence. It was further contended that they are respected persons and they have suffered a lot on account of previous orders on assessment and the purpose of assessment would not be served if they are sent to prison. It was contended lastly that the petitioners are ready to pay up the dues on the assessment head. As against above, learned counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department has resisted the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that the offence assumes serious proportions not only on account of the tax assessed against the firm of the petitioners but on account of disclosure on assessment of tax which was not found true disclosure and that aspect of the complaint assumes serious proportions. As may be known to every one that tax assessments are done on assumptions because it is assumed that the Revenue was taking into account certain facts which may not be correctly stated 100 percent but may be correct to the maximum extent possible. It was also contended that in spite of re-assessment of tax the petitioners did not pay - 3 - any heed to it and evaded its payment. Though, I do not take into consideration the contention of the counsel for the Income Tax Department that the petitioners were not coming out with true disclosure of the true Income relying upon statements of the complainant, but from perusal of complaint petition it appears a serious offence that in spite of being assessed of certain income the petitioners or their firm has not been good enough in paying the dues to the revenue. The pleas of a person could not be appreciated under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. if the acts complained of on evasion of appears brought against the petitioners. The petitioners were evading tax intentionally and willfully, considering which, I am not inclined to direct the release of the petitioners on anticipatory bail. The petition is dismissed. It was contended lastly as indicated above that the petitioners are ready to pay up the dues to the Revenue. If they do it, the court below may consider granting bail to them irrespective of the present order. DKS/ (Dharnidhar Jha, J.)