Income Tax Prosecution U/s 276CC: Allahabad High Court Stays Non-Bailable Warrants Pending Compounding Decision

The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has stayed the operation of non-bailable warrants issued against Shafaat Ejaz Siddiqui in a complaint filed under Section 276CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The interim protection was granted to enable the applicant to move an application for compounding of the offence before the competent authority. The bench of Justice Brij Raj Singh has observed that till expiry of five weeks or till disposal of the compounding application—whichever is earlier—the criminal proceedings against the applicant, including execution of non-bailable warrants, shall remain stayed. The prosecution originated from an assessment order dated January 31, 2014, alleging non-disclosure of income for Assessment Year 2011–2012. The applicant’s appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Lucknow, was dismissed ex parte on September 1, 2015. A penalty order under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act was subsequently issued on February 5, 2016. Based on these proceedings, a criminal complaint under Section 276CC of the Income Tax Act was filed on March 30, 2016, and cognizance was taken the same day. Counsel for the applicant argued that summons were repeatedly issued from 2016 till October 2023 without proper service or any service report on record. It was further contended that non-bailable warrants were issued on January 4, 2024, without exhausting the stages of summons and bailable warrants, allegedly in violation of settled legal principles. The applicant also pointed out that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, by order dated May 28, 2025, had allowed the appeals with consent of parties and remanded the matter to the CIT (Appeals) for passing a fresh order. Despite this, coercive proceedings continued before the trial court. During the hearing, the applicant did not press the petition on merits but sought liberty to file an application for compounding of the offence under Section 276(2) of the Income Tax Act. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court’s decision in Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, which dealt with consideration of compounding applications. Taking note of the submission, the High Court directed that if the applicant files a compounding application within one week, the competent authority shall decide it in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter. The court disposed of the application granting interim protection while leaving the merits of the prosecution open. Case Details Case Title: Shafaat Ejaz Siddiqui Versus UOI Case No.: Application U/S 482 No. - 1281 Of 2026 Date: 16/02/2026 Counsel For Petitioner: Anuuj Taandon, Mohammad Sufiyan Counsel For Respondent: Kushagra Dikshit Click Here To Read Order Read More: Fabrication Of Judicial Record: Rajasthan High Court Directs Inquiry Against Judicial Officer

Income Tax Prosecution U/s 276CC: Allahabad High Court Stays Non-Bailable Warrants Pending Compounding Decision

Membership Required

Latest articles

OIO Service On Assessee Not Complete If Dept. Fails To Prove Service: CESTAT

No Customs Duty Demand Without DGFT Cancellation of FPS Scrips: CESTAT

Assessment Quashed for Failure to Follow Mandatory S. 148B Procedure in Search-Based Additions: ITAT

Denial of Effective Hearing During Insolvency: Delhi HC Quashes Rs. 232 Crore Ex Parte Income Tax Assessment

More like this

OIO Service On Assessee Not Complete If Dept. Fails To Prove Service: CESTAT

No Customs Duty Demand Without DGFT Cancellation of FPS Scrips: CESTAT

Assessment Quashed for Failure to Follow Mandatory S. 148B Procedure in Search-Based Additions: ITAT

Membership Required

Membership Required

Income Tax Prosecution U/s 276CC: Allahabad High Court Stays Non-Bailable Warrants Pending Compounding Decision

Membership Required

Latest articles

OIO Service On Assessee Not Complete If Dept. Fails To Prove Service: CESTAT

No Customs Duty Demand Without DGFT Cancellation of FPS Scrips: CESTAT

Assessment Quashed for Failure to Follow Mandatory S. 148B Procedure in Search-Based Additions: ITAT

Denial of Effective Hearing During Insolvency: Delhi HC Quashes Rs. 232 Crore Ex Parte Income Tax Assessment

More like this

OIO Service On Assessee Not Complete If Dept. Fails To Prove Service: CESTAT

No Customs Duty Demand Without DGFT Cancellation of FPS Scrips: CESTAT

Assessment Quashed for Failure to Follow Mandatory S. 148B Procedure in Search-Based Additions: ITAT

Subscribe