• twitter-icon
Unlimited Tax Return Filing


Delhi HC Sets Aside TDS Prosecution Against Petitioner Wrongly Shown as Company Director

Delhi HC's Order in The Case of Akansha Kapoor vs Income Tax Office

The Delhi High Court quashed criminal proceedings related to TDS. The Court found that the prosecution’s case was based on the erroneous assumption that the petitioner was a director and the principal officer of the accused company.

The Income Tax Department’s complaint against Akansha Kapoor (petitioner) alleged that she did not deposit the required Tax Deducted at Source within the stipulated period during FY 2016-17.

Based on the material placed before it, the trial court found a prima facie case and issued summons to the accused for the alleged offences.

U/S 279(1) of the Income Tax Act has been issued to the petitioner on the claim that she was a director of the accused company. Under Section 279(1), the sanction granted specified her as a director of the deductor company. The criminal complaint shows her as a director and as the principal officer.

U/s 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 482 CrPC, the applicant approached the Court and asked to set aside the criminal proceedings insofar as they relate to her.

The counsel for the revenue before the Court acknowledged that the applicant had never been a director of the accused company.

The Bench, Justice Manoj Jain said that, “Show Cause Notice, order passed under Section 2(35) of Income Tax Act, sanction order under Section 279(1) of Income Tax Act and complaint, all are based on the premise that the petitioner herein was Director in the accused company and, therefore, she has been projected as Principal Officer.”

The Court said that “Clearly, her prosecution, while being treating her as Director of the accused company, is fallacious and thus not sustainable.”

Read Also: Delhi HC Dismisses IT Dept’s Appeal to Extend Tax Assessment Deadline Over Invalid Swiss Tax Reference

The petition was permitted, and the prosecution was set aside only to the extent concerning the petitioner.

Case TitleAkansha Kapoor vs Income Tax Office
Case No.CNR No. DLHC010844502024
Counsel For PetitionerMs. Mallika Parmar
Counsel For RespondentMr Puneet Rai, Mr Ashvini Kumar and Mr Rishabh Nangia
Delhi High CourtRead Order

Disclaimer:- "All the information given is from credible and authentic resources and has been published after moderation. Any change in detail or information other than fact must be considered a human error. The blog we write is to provide updated information. You can raise any query on matters related to blog content. Also, note that we don’t provide any type of consultancy so we are sorry for being unable to reply to consultancy queries. Also, we do mention that our replies are solely on a practical basis and we advise you to cross verify with professional authorities for a fact check."

Published by Arpit Kulshrestha
Arpit Kulshrestha seeks higher interests in financial services, taxation, GST, I-T, etc. Writes articles with depth knowledge and is extensive for the same. The resources provide effective articles for the products of SAG infotech which provides taxation and IT software. Writing from observations and researching makes his articles virtuous.
View more posts
SAGINFOTECH PRODUCTS

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Latest Posts

Tax Offer in 2026

Powering India's Taxation Experts with Innovation

Upto 20% Off
Tax, ROC/MCA, XBRL, Payroll, Online GST

Limited Offer, Hurry

New Offer in 2026

Upto 20% Discount on Tax Software

    Select Product*

    Genius Software