Dismissing the criminal revision petitions the Court held that where initial charge was for offence under section 276(C)(1) for non-payment of tax and charge now sought to be added by way of alteration of charge was for evasion of payment of tax for very same assessment year and, sanction under section 279(1) had already been granted for offence under section 276(C)(1), there was no error in order passed by Special Sessions Judge, in allowing application.(AY. 1983-84 & 1984-85)
G. Victor Devasahayam v. ACIT (2022) 441 ITR 131 / 284 Taxman 531 (Mad.)(HC)
S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Evasion of tax-Alteration of charges based on additional witness-Sanction already obtained-New or fresh sanction is not required-Disputed question of fact of non-issuance of notice by Tax Recovery Officer can be confronted in Trial framing additional charge based on additional evidence-Order passed by Special Sessions Judge, in allowing application was affirmed.[S. 276(1),276C(2), 279(1) ; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,S.216(5)]