MY KOLKATA EDUGRAPH
ADVERTISEMENT
Regular-article-logo Thursday, 03 July 2025

STREET LEGAL 31-03-2004

Voluntary gesture No bad intent Fish or foul?

The Telegraph Online Published 31.03.04, 12:00 AM

Voluntary gesture

A Canadian prosecuting agency requested the Indian authorities to obtain blood samples and a statement from a person in India on a ‘voluntary’ basis in relation to a case of murder committed in Canada. The CBI obtained directions for investigation under section 166B of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 166B inter alia enables investigating authorities to look into offences if so requested by foreign agencies. On appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the order holding that the letter specifies that statement and blood samples are to be obtained ‘voluntarily’, whereas orders in terms of section 166B would amount to ‘compelling’ the person to do the same (Narinder Singh Bogarh vs State of Punjab).

No bad intent

When a partnership firm filed revised income tax returns, the income tax authorities treated the difference between the income in the original and the revised return as ‘concealment’ of income. Apart from levying penalty, the authorities filed a complaint alleging conspiracy, cheating, filing false return, concealment of income to evade tax etc. The Income Tax Tribunal held that such revised returns were voluntary and there was no ‘concealment’. The assessee moved the court for quashing the criminal case but did not succeed. On appeal, the Supreme Court inter alia held that as there was absence of fraudulent intention, the question of committing offence under Section 420 does not arise. A matter which has been settled by the tribunal need not be dragged into the courts unless the Act can be described as culpable (KC Builder & Anor. Vs Asst Commr of Income Tax).

Fish or foul?

The Andhra Pradesh government levied fee under the Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock Markets) Act, on a company purchasing and processing dead prawns for export. Livestock, as defined in the Act, includes “fish”. The company challenged the demand submitting inter alia that dead or live prawns cannot be treated as “livestock”. Relying on the dictionary meaning and definitions in other Acts, the Supreme Court inter alia held that prawn is included in the definition of “fish” in the Maritime Zones of India (Regulation of Fishing by Foreign Vessels) Act (ITC Ltd vs The person in-charge Agricultural Mark. Com., Kakinada).

SOLON

Follow us on:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT