M/S M B Timber (P) LTD & Ors vs. State Of West Bengal & Anr
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
2024 SL. 64+65 Court No. 551 Suvayan/ pg
C.R.R. 2928 of 2012
In Re: - An Appeal under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, 1973. And In the matter of: M/S M. B. Timber (P) Ltd. & Ors. …for the petitioners. With C.R.R. 2929 of 2012
In Re: - An Appeal under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C, 1973. And In the matter of: G. B. Logs & Timber (P) Ltd. & Ors. …for the petitioners.
Mr. Kallol Basu Mr. A. Chakraborty …for the petitioners. Ms. Avishek Sinha …for the State.
By filing the instant two applications under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the G.R. Case No. 3063 of 2012 pending before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (now Chief Judicial Magistrate), Kolkata arises of Bowbazar P.S. Case Nos. 481 of 2012 dated 06.08.2012 and G.R. Case No.3064 of 2012 arises of Bowbazar P.S. Case No.482 of 2012 dated 06.08.2012 both under Sections 93(6)/93(7) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘said Act’) read with Sections 120B/420/403/467/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC).
From the materials as placed before this Court, it reveals that the aforesaid P.S. cases were initiated on the basis of the two separate written complaints both dated 02.08.2012 by one Md.
2
Nijamul Islam, Sales Tax Officer, Bureau of Investigation, with the Deputy Commissioner, Enforcement Branch, Kolkata Police stating, inter alia, that two enquiries were initiated on account of the false claims for input tax credit by the accused persons (who are the petitioners before this Court in these two cases) by means of procuring fake tax invoices. It has been alleged in the said written complaint that on scrutiny of the seized documents and other materials it became evident that the present petitioners who are the accused before the trial court had fraudulently claimed input tax credit to the tune of Rs.46,71,845/- and to the tune of Rs. 82,96,483/-, respectively. On the basis of the aforesaid two written complaints, the aforementioned two P.S. cases were started. Investigations were taken up and two separate charge-sheets under Sections 96(6)/93(7) of the West Bengal Value Added Tax Act, 2003 read with Sections 120B/420/403/467/468/471 IPC were submitted against the the Hon’ble Apex Court while dealing with the subject of quashing of proceeding under Section 482 Cr.P.C. expressed the following view:- “The High Court would exercise its inherent juri iction 516 is attracted , which are as under:- (1) The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent juri iction to quash a criminal proceeding and,
5
in particular, a first information report unless the allegations contained therein, even if given face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclosed no cognizable offence. (2) For the said purpose the Court, save and except in very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the defence. (3) Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the FIR disclose commission of an offence, the court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused to hold absence of any mens rea or actus reus. (4) If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same by itself may not be ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue.”
The same view has been taken in the reported decision of (Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.