Crl.a/201/2022 Of The Income Tax Department v. Smt. Bhaskara Subramanyam Jayashree
High Court
18 Jul 2024 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Crl.a/201/2022 Of The Income Tax Department v. Smt. Bhaskara Subramanyam Jayashree
Date of order
18 Jul 2024
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Crl.a/201/2022 Of The Income Tax Department v. Smt. Bhaskara Subramanyam Jayashree, the High Court (2024) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
Digitally signed byLAKSHMINARAYANAMURTHY RAJASHRILocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 18 DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 201 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD No.7 (2)(1) BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE - 560 095.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI SUSHAL TIWARI N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
SMT. BHASKARA SUBRAMANYAM JAYASHREE 52 YEARS No.42, 1 FLOOR, 8 E MAIN 4 BLOCK, JAYANAGAR BANGALORE – 5600 001.
…RESPONDENT
THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF Cr.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED:12.10.2018 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMICS OFFENCES, BENGALURU IN C.C.No.50/2018 AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
- 2 -
NC: 2024:KHC:27987CRL.A No. 201 of 2022
JUDGMENT
1.This appeal is filed challenging the order of
discharge of respondent - accused dated 12.10.2018 passed in C.C. No. 50/2018 by Special Court for Economic Offences at Bengaluru.
2.This appeal has been filed under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C. which reads :
“(4) If such an order of acquittal is passed
in any case instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant in this behalf, grants special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal, the complainant may present such an appeal to the High Court.”
3.The impugned order is not an order of acquittal. Under the impugned order the respondent - accused has
been discharged. Therefore, this appeal is not maintainable. Hence, it is dismissed.
4.Learned counsel for appellant submits that he has filed a memo seeking conversion of this appeal in to
revision and submits that a coordinate Bench of this Court
in a similar matter has converted the appeal into revision .
5.Said submission of learned counsel for appellant is not tenable as the provisions of Cr.P.C. does not provide
for conversion of appeal into revision.
Sd/- JUDGE
LRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 17
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.