High Court of Judicature at Allahabad · Judgments and reasoned final orders
Tabish Mansoor v. Union of India through Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow
Application u/s 482 No. 1246 of 2026 ·
Criminal prosecution under section 276CC (where non-bailable warrants and section 82 CrPC proclamation were issued despite ITAT consent remand of the underlying AY 2011-12 quantum appeal to CIT(A)) stayed for 5 weeks to decide compounding application under section 279(2) following Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria v. CCIT (2025 INSC 155).
1. FACTS OF THE CASE
Following an assessment order dated 31.01.2014 for AY 2011-12, an ex-parte CIT(A) dismissal dated 01.09.2015, and a penalty order under section 271(1)(c) dated 05.02.2016, the Income Tax Department filed Complaint Case No. 540/2016 on 30.03.2016 under section 276CC before the Special CJM (Custom), Lucknow. Although the ITAT by order dated 28.05.2025 allowed the assessee's bunch of appeals with the Department's consent and remanded the matter to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, the trial court issued non-bailable warrants on 08.01.2024 and a proclamation under section 82 CrPC on 02.01.2026 without prior service of summons. In Application u/s 482 No. 1246 of 2026, the applicant sought leave to file a compounding application under section 279(2) (printed as 'Section 276(2)' in para 5) relying on Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr., 2025 INSC 155.
2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT
Recording the applicant's statement that he wished to move an application for compounding the offence within one week in light of the Supreme Court judgment in Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria v. CCIT (2025 INSC 155), Justice Brij Raj Singh held that the competent authority should decide the compounding application within a time-bound schedule while staying coercive criminal proceedings in the interim.
3. JUDICIAL DECISION
The High Court directed that if the applicant moves a compounding application within one week, the competent authority shall decide it in accordance with law within four weeks thereafter, and stayed the criminal proceedings against the applicant in Complaint Case No. 540/2016 for five weeks or until disposal of the compounding application.
4. OUTCOME
In favour of the assessee (Tabish Mansoor); compounding application directed to be decided within 4 weeks and section 276CC criminal proceedings stayed.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
AKHB analysis: Where the foundational assessment/appellate order underlying a section 276CC prosecution has already been remanded de novo by the ITAT and the taxpayer invokes compounding in reliance on Vinubhai Mohanlal Dobaria v. CCIT (2025 INSC 155), the High Court under section 482 CrPC / section 528 BNSS will stay coercive NBW and section 82 proclamation processes pending time-bound disposal of the compounding petition.
Source and verification
Reviewed from the complete 3-page official High Court judgment PDF (20260216_UPHC020107112026.pdf, SHA-256: 83dfa3602a786a316d0ae67c043c1e61e8102bf14aa149294c698f8955cc4c23).
Original PDF: 3 pages · SHA-256: 83dfa3602a786a316d0ae67c043c1e61e8102bf14aa149294c698f8955cc4c23
Supplied source-reviewed note retained; original bytes and identity validation checked in this release. Substantive re-review is not claimed for this record.
Refers to the Income-tax Act, 1961 and allied statutory rules/circulars as applicable to the relevant assessment years.
No subsequent Supreme Court reversal or stay is recorded in the source judgment text.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
AI-assisted source review. Independent human approval is not represented.
General research only. Read the complete judgment and verify applicable law and subsequent treatment before reliance.