
A recent case in Delhi resulted in the conviction and sentencing of a woman to six months in jail for not filing a return on income of Rs two crores. The case was brought forward by the Income Tax Office (ITO), which alleged that tax deducted at source (TDS) amounting to Rs. Two lakh was deducted against a receipt of Rs. two crore made to the accused during the financial year 2013-14. However, no return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 was filed by the accused.
The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) Mayank Mittal sentenced the woman, named Savitri, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case. The sentence includes six months of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000. In default of paying the fine, the woman will undergo an additional one month of simple imprisonment.
However, the court granted her 30 days’ bail to challenge the order after considering her application.
Purpose of the Provision and Sentencing Considerations
The special public prosecutor (SPP), Arpit Batra, argued that the purpose of imposing a sentence on a convict is not solely based on the amount of tax evaded but also on the purpose of the provision. The purpose is to deter individuals liable to pay taxes from failing to file their income tax returns on time and pay the taxes accordingly. The SPP further argued that a maximum amount of imprisonment should be awarded to the convict, along with a substantial fine.
On the other hand, the counsel for the convict argued that the sentence should take into account the social circumstances of the convict and her condition at the time of the crime and at the time of imposing the sentence. It was mentioned that the convict is a widow and uneducated, with no one else in the family to take care of them except the convict herself.
Background and Legal Proceedings
According to the prosecution, the Income Tax Office issued a letter on September 11, 2017, to the convict, requesting verification of whether the income tax return was filed for the assessment year 2014-15. However, the accused failed to file a reply. Subsequently, a notice was issued on January 10, 2018, under Section 142(1) of The Income Tax Act, 1961, directing the accused to furnish the return for the assessment year 2014-15, but no compliance was made by the accused.
Further, on January 22, 2018, the Income Tax Office issued a notice under Section 271F of The Income Tax Act to the accused for non-filing of the return, but the accused did not reply to the notice. As a result, the accused was directed to pay a penalty of Rs 5,000 through an order dated February 9, 2018.
Before the issuance of a sanction, a show cause notice under Section 276CC of The Income Tax Act was issued to the accused. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi, passed a sanction order permitting the prosecution against the accused and directed the Income Tax Officer to file the complaint under Section 276CC read with 279 of The Income Tax Act.
During the trial, the court found that the complainant had proven beyond reasonable doubt the service of letters and notices issued to the accused, and the accused failed to file a return of income. The court also noted that the accused could not provide any evidence or facts to bring her case within the scope of the proviso to Section 276CC of The Income Tax Act or to rebut the presumption of culpable mental state under Section 278E of The Income Tax Act.
Conclusion
In conclusion, a woman in Delhi was recently convicted and sentenced to six months in jail for not filing a return on income of Rs two crores. The case was brought forward by the Income Tax Office, and the sentencing took into account the purpose of the provision and the social circumstances of the convict. The court found that the accused failed to file a return of income and could not provide evidence to support her case.