Crl.a/2104/2023 Of The Income Tax Department v. M/S Jenious Clothing Private Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2104/2023 C/W CRL.A. Nos.1339/2020, 925/2021, 950/2021, 954/2021, 1207/2021, 1222/2021, 1223/2021, 1224/2021, 1229/2021, 1319/2021, 1326/2021, 1330/2021, 1337/2021, 672/2022, 810/2022, 898/2022, 2233/2022, 2245/2022 AND 1913/2023. IN CRL.A.No.2104/2024: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN NO.59, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND : 1. M/S. JENIOUS CLOTHING PRIVATE LTD NO.1-35/5/1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR NO.1-35/5/1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE – 560 022. (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR –SUNIL V RAHEJA) 2. SUNIL V RAHEJA, MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S. JENIOUS CLOTHING PRIVATE LTD., NO.1-35/5/1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE – 560 022. (SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DTD. 7.12.2019 WAS DISCHARGED BEFORE TRIAL COURT) ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 BY S.P.P. FOR THE STATE PRAYING TO MAY BE PLEASED TO ENHANCE THE LEVY OF FINE IMPOSED ON FIRST RESPONDENT IN C.C.NO.89/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCE AT BENGALURU DATED 25.09.2020 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.NO.1339/2020: BETWEEN : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CIRCLE-2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. PEOPLE TECH IT CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED 6 FLOOR, GRAMMA BLOCK SIGMA SOFT TECH PARK, WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 066. ( A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT) …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SEEKING FOR ENHANCEMENT OF SENTENCE BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.10.2019 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.148/2019 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.NO.925/2021: BETWEEN : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CIRCLE-2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. PEOPLE TECH IT CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED 6 FLOOR, GRAMMA BLOCK, SIGMA SOFT TECH PARK WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD BANGALORE – 560 066. ( A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT) REP. BY KUTUMBA RAO MEKA. ….RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT RELATING TO SENTENCE DATED 19.10.2019 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.147/2019 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.950/2021: BETWEEN : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT CIRCLE-2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. PEOPLE TECH IT CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED 6 FLOOR, GRAMMA BLOCK, SIGMA SOFT TECH PARK WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 066. ( A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT) ….RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL OF RESPONDENT VIDE ITS JUDGMENT DATED 19.10.2019 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.148/2019 AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENTS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 276B OF INCOME TAX ACT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.NO.954/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WARD-2(3), H.M.T.BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT AND: AND: M/S. PEOPLE TECH IT CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED 6 FLOOR, GRAMMA BLOCK, SIGMA SOFT TECH PARK WHITEFIELD MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 066. ( A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT) ….RESPONDENT (BY SRI. S. ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL OF RESPONDENT VIDE ITS JUDGMENT DATED 19.10.2019 PASSED BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BENGALURU IN C.C.NO.148/2019 AND CONVICT THE RESPONDENTS FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 276B OF INCOME TAX ACT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.NO.954/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WARD-2(3), H.M.T.BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT AND: M/S. PANANCEA HOSPITAL PVT. LTD No.334, 3 STAGE, 3 FLOOR DR. SIDDAIAH PURANIK ROAD BASAVESHWARANAGAR BANGALORE – 560 079 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DR. C JAYANNA. …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGEMENT RELATING TO SENTENCE DATED 16.11.2019 IN C.C.No.101/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU AND ENHANCE THE SENTENCE PASSED AGAINST ACCUSED No.1 COMPANY FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 276B OF THE I.T ACT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1207/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -3(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN No.59, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. RAVIPATI BROADCASTERS PVT. LTD., No.482, RVS COMPLEX, 3 FLOOR 80 FEET ROAD, HMT LAYOUT R T NAGAR BANGALORE – 560 032 REP. BY RAVIPATI SRINIVASARAVI CHANDRASHEKAR (BY SRI ANNAMALAI S, ADVOCATE) …RESPODNENT THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT IN C.C.No.74/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU DATED 19.12.2020 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1222/2021: BETWEEN : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TDS H.M.T. BHAVAN, No.59 BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 032. NOW PRESENT REPRESENTED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TSD) …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LTD., No.820, GOLDEN HOUSE, 80 FEET ROAD 8 BLOCK, KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 095. (A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT REP BY ITS PRL. OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS, PRATAP AND SANJAY RAI-A2) 2. SANJAY RAI, DIRECTOR M/S. GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LTD., No.820, GOLDEN HOUSE 80 FEET ROAD, 8 BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 095. 3. K KRISHNAN, DIRECTOR M/S. GOLDEN GATE PROPERTIES LTD., No.820, GOLDEN HOUSE 80 FEET ROAD, 8 BLOCK KORAMANGALA BANGALORE – 560 095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G S NAGHARISH, ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R3 SRI G R SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE SENTENCE PASSED APPROPRIATELY IN C.C.No.68/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU DATED 23.10.2020 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1223/2021: BETWEEN : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TDS CRICLE-3(1) H.M.T. BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SICON DESIGN TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED 4 FLOOR, SRI NARAYANI ARCADE, No.321-247/3-4 KUNDALAHALLI, ITPL MAIN ROAD, BROKE FILED, BANGALORE – 560 037 REPRESENTED BY SHIVASHANKAR A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT …RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHANDRASHEKARA K, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE SENTENCE PASSED VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 15.02.2020 AND 17.02.2020 IN C.C.No.77/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BENGALURU AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1224/2021: BETWEEN : THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TDS CRICLE-3(1) H.M.T. BHAVAN, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SICON DESIGN TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED 4 FLOOR, SRI NARAYANI ARCADE, No.321-247/3-4 KUNDALAHALLI, ITPL MAIN ROAD, BROKE FILED, BANGALORE – 560 037 REPRESENTED BY SHIVASHANKAR A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT …RESPONDENT (BY SRI CHANDRASHEKARA K, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE SENTENCE PASSED VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 15.02.2020 AND 17.02.2020 IN C.C.No.77/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BENGALURU AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1224/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-3(1) H.M.T. BHAVAN, No.59 BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SOWPARNIKA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED No.750, C-BLOCK, 1 & 5 MAIN ROAD ACES LAYOUT, KUNDANAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 036. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI SUBRAMANINAN SREENIVASAN. (BY SRI ANNAMALAI S, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.86/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCE AT BENGALURU DATED 28.10.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1229/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-3(1) H.M.T. BHAVAN, No.59 BELLARY ROAD, BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SOWPARNIKA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED No.750, C-BLOCK, 1 & 5 MAIN ROAD ACES LAYOUT, KUNDANAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 036. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI SUBRAMANINAN SREENIVASAN. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANNAMALAI S, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.84/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BANGALORE DATED 28.10.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1319/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD-2(3) HMT BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003 No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003 (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY TIS DIRECTOR – RAJ LALWANI) REP BY TIS DIRECTOR – RAJ LALWANI) 2. RAJ LALWANI, DIRECTOR M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANARAVARPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANARAVARPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 19.03.2020 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE IN C.C.No.81/2019 THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED No.1 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 276B OF I.T. ACT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1326/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD-2(3) HMT BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY TIS DIRECTOR – RAJ LALWANI) 2. RAJ LALWANI, DIRECTOR M/s. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANARAVARPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. …RESPONDENTS IN CRL.A.No.1326/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD-2(3) HMT BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY TIS DIRECTOR – RAJ LALWANI) 2. RAJ LALWANI, DIRECTOR M/s. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANARAVARPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 19.03.2020 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE IN C.C.No.78/2019 THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED No.1 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 276B OF I.T. ACT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1330/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, WARD-2(3) HMT BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/s. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANAVARATHPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP. BY TIS DIRECTOR – RAJ LALWANI) REP. BY TIS DIRECTOR – RAJ LALWANI) 2. RAJ LALWANI, DIRECTOR M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED M/S. POOJA FOOTWEAR PRIVATE LIMITED No.19/1, SHANKARA DEVARA MUTT LANE MANARAVARPET, BANGALORE – 560 003. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION DATED 19.03.2020 PASSED BY THE PRESIDING SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE IN C.C.No.77/2019 THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED No.1 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 276B OF I.T. ACT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1337/2021: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. ATLAS BRANDS PVT. LTD No.13/14, BRANDS PRIVATE LTD., SIGNGSANDRA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BANGALORE (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS DIRECTOR-SECOND ACCUSED NAMELY RAMESH S) No.13/14, BRANDS PRIVATE LTD., SIGNGSANDRA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BANGALORE (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REP BY ITS DIRECTOR-SECOND ACCUSED NAMELY RAMESH S) 2. RAMESH S BULCHANDANI, DIRECTOR M/S. ATLAS BRANDS PVT. LTD No.13/14, BRANDS PRIVATE LTD SIGNGSANDRA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BANGALORE – 560 068. M/S. ATLAS BRANDS PVT. LTD No.13/14, BRANDS PRIVATE LTD SIGNGSANDRA VILLAGE, BEGUR HOBLI BANGALORE – 560 068. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE LEVY OF FINE AGAINST RESPONDENT No.1 IN C.C.No.104/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU DATED 19.03.2020 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.672/2022: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -3(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN No.59, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. RAVIPATI BROADCASTERS PVT. LTD., No.482, RVS COMPEX 3 FLOOR, 80 FEET ROAD HMT LAYOUT, R T NAGAR BANGALORE – 560 032. …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.76/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE DATED 19.12.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.810/2022: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT ASSISTANCE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DS CIRCLE -2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. RAVIPATI BROADCASTERS PVT. LTD., No.482, RVS COMPEX 3 FLOOR, 80 FEET ROAD HMT LAYOUT, R T NAGAR BANGALORE – 560 032. …RESPONDENT THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.76/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BANGALORE DATED 19.12.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.810/2022: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT ASSISTANCE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DS CIRCLE -2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. MIRAFRA SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD No.72 & 73, AKSHAY TECH PART, 2 FLOOR No.72 & 73, AKSHAY TECH PART, 2 FLOOR EPIP ZONE, PHASE-1, WHITEFILED BANGALORE – 560 066. (A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR –SHYAN PADALA) 2. SHYAM PADALA, DIRECTOR No.72 & 73, AKSHAY TECH PARK, 2 FLOOR EPIP ZONE, PHASE -1, WHITEFILED BANGALORE – 560 066. No.72 & 73, AKSHAY TECH PARK, 2 FLOOR EPIP ZONE, PHASE -1, WHITEFILED BANGALORE – 560 066. …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE SENTENCE PASSED AGAINST ACCUSED No.1 IN C.C.No.50/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU DATED 16.09.2021 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.898/2022: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX OFFICER INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WARD-2(3), H.M.T.BHAVAN BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E.I.SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. M/S. PANACEA HOSPITAL PVT. LTD No.334, 3 STAGE, 3 FLOOR DR. SIDDAIAH PURANIK ROAD BASAVESHWARANAGAR No.1, BANGALORE. ( A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER COMPANIES ACT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR – R-2). 2. DR.C.JAYANNA, MANAGING DIRECTOR M/s. PANACEA HOSPITAL PVT. LTD No.334, 3 STAGE, 3 FLOOR DR.SIDDAIAH PURANIK ROAD BASAVESHWARANAGAR, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENS THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 CR.P.C. PRAYING TO ENAHNCE THE SENTENCE PASSED AGAINST ACCUSED No.1 IN C.C.No.87/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU DATED 16.10.2021 AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.2233/2022: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-3(1) H.M.T. BHAVAN, No.59 BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SOWPARNIKA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED No.750, C-BLOCK, 1 & 5 MAIN ROAD ACES LAYOUT, KUNDANAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 036. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI SUBRAMANINAN SREENIVASAN. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANNAMALAI S, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.85/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BANGALORE DATED 28.10.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.2245/2022: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE-3(1) H.M.T. BHAVAN, No.59 BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SOWPARNIKA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED No.750, C-BLOCK, 1 & 5 MAIN ROAD ACES LAYOUT, KUNDANAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 036. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI SUBRAMANINAN SREENIVASAN. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANNAMALAI S, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.128/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BANGALORE DATED 28.10.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1913/2023: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN No.59, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND : …APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. SOWPARNIKA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED No.750, C-BLOCK, 1 & 5 MAIN ROAD ACES LAYOUT, KUNDANAHALLI BANGALORE – 560 036. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR SRI SUBRAMANINAN SREENIVASAN. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ANNAMALAI S, ADVOCATE) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377(1) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.128/2018 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BANGALORE DATED 28.10.2020 AND ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT AND ETC., IN CRL.A.No.1913/2023: BETWEEN : THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT BY ITS INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -2(1), H.M.T. BHAVAN No.59, BELLARY ROAD BANGALORE – 560 032. … APPELLANT (BY SRI E I SANMATHI, ADVOCATE) AND : 1. M/S. JENIOUS CLOTHING PRIVATE LTD No.1-35/5/1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE. No.1-35/5/1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE. (A COMPANY REGISTRED UNDER COMPANIES ACT. REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR –SUNIL V RAHEJA) 2. SUNIL V RAHEJA, MANAGING DIRECTOR M/S. JENIOUS CLOTHING PRIVATE LTD., M/S. JENIOUS CLOTHING PRIVATE LTD., No.1-35/5/1, INDUSTRIAL SUBURB TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE. (SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DTD. 7.12.2019 WAS DISCHARGED BEFORE TRIAL COURT) TUMKUR ROAD, YESHWANTHPUR BANGALORE. (SECOND RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DTD. 7.12.2019 WAS DISCHARGED BEFORE TRIAL COURT) ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S ANNAMALAI, ADVOCATE FOR R1) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 Cr.P.C. PLEASED TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN C.C.No.90/2019 BY THE SPECIAL COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BANGALORE DATED 25.09.2020 AND ENHANCE THE LEVY OF FINE IMPOSED ON FIRST RESPONDENT AND ETC., THESE CRIMINAL APPEALS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVARJ, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING; JUDGMENT 1.The Income Tax Department has filed these appeals under Section 377 of Cr.P.C. against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy. The details of these appeals are as under: 2.The judgment of conviction and order on sentence has been passed by the Special Court for Economic Offences, Bengaluru, Special Court established under Section 280-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter for the sake of brevity referred to as the `I.T. Act, 1961’). A special Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class has been established under notification dated 01.09.1982 bearing No. LAW/106/LCE 79 issued by the Government of Karnataka reads as under: “NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 11 read with clause (j) of section 2 and Section 13 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (Central Act 2 of 1974), the Government of Karnataka, in consultation with the High Court of Karnataka, establishes for a period of one year with effect from the 13[th] day of September 1982, a special court of Judicial Magistrate First Class for the trial of offences under the Acts specified in the schedule having jurisdiction within the local area of the revenue district of Bangalore including the Bangalore Metropolitan area. SCHEDULE 1. The Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 2. The Imports and Exports (Central) Act, 1947 3. The Wealth Tax Act, 1957 4. The Income Tax Act, 1961 5. The Customs Act, 1962 6. The Gold (Control) Act, 1968 7. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 8. Companies Profits (Surtax) Act, 1964 9. The Gift Tax Act, 1958 10. The Export (Quality, Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 11. The Companies Act, 1956 12. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. 3.The order pursuant to which the above notification is issued reads as under: “PROCEEDINGS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA “Subject : Special Court – Constitution of – for trial of Economic Offences – at Bangalore from 13.09.1982 – Orders reg. --- ORDER NO. LAW 106 LCE 79/DATED01.09.1982 Read: 1. Letter No. 2-1-1979 Judl. dated 27-4-1979 from the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi. 3. The Wealth Tax Act, 1957 4. The Income Tax Act, 1961 5. The Customs Act, 1962 6. The Gold (Control) Act, 1968 7. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 8. Companies Profits (Surtax) Act, 1964 9. The Gift Tax Act, 1958 10. The Export (Quality, Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 11. The Companies Act, 1956 12. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. 3.The order pursuant to which the above notification is issued reads as under: “PROCEEDINGS OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA “Subject : Special Court – Constitution of – for trial of Economic Offences – at Bangalore from 13.09.1982 – Orders reg. --- ORDER NO. LAW 106 LCE 79/DATED01.09.1982 Read: 1. Letter No. 2-1-1979 Judl. dated 27-4-1979 from the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi. 2. Correspondence ending with letter C.No. VIII/17/21/79 Legal dated 18-10-79 from the collector of Central Excise, Central Revenues Building, Bangalore. 3. Letter No.23-6-79 dated 14-4-81 and Wireless Messages under No.23/5/82 Jus dated 3-5-82, 27-4-82, 26-5-82-and 16-6-82 from the Government of India, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi. 4. Correspondence ending with letter No.GOB.393/1979 dated 21-8-1982 from the Registrar, High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore. PREAMBLE: The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, in their letter No.2-1-79 Judl. Dated 27-4-79 have suggested to this Government that additional courts may be established exclusively for dealing with economic offences, in accordance with the 47th report of the law Commission recommending the establishment of Special Courts for the effective and speedy prosecution of such offences. The Government of India have suggested that the territorial jurisdiction of the Special Court may be the whole State. The suggestion of the Government of India was examined in consultation with the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore. The High Court of Karnataka suggested that a Special Court may be established for Bangalore District including the Metropolitan area of the City of Bangalore. The High Court of Karnataka is of the view that conferring state wide jurisdiction to the Special Court would involve time, expenditure and serious inconvenience to the accused, witnesses, defence counsel etc.. The High Court is also of the view that the question of establishing similar courts in Divisional Head Quarters could be considered later after observing the functioning of the proposed Court at Bangalore. Accordingly, the Registrar, High Court of Karnataka has forwarded proposals for the creation of a Special Court at Bangalore for trial of economic offences under certain Central Acts. Presided over by an officer of the rank of a Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate together with certain non- gazetted staff in accordance with the uniform staffing pattern to be attached to the court for a period, of one year in the first instance. O R D E R After examining all the relevant aspects of the case, sanction is hear by accorded to the establishment of Special Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class at Bangalore for the trial of offences under the twelve Central Acts note specified below with the post of a presiding officer and the non-gazetted staff attached thereto as detailed in the margin having jurisdiction over the area compromising the revenue district of Bangalore (including the metropolitan area of the Bangalore city) for a period of one year from 13-9-82 in the first instance. xxx xxx xxx The 12 Central Acts. Referred to above are the following namely: 1. The Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 2. The Imports and Exports (Central) Act, 1947 3. The Wealth Tax Act, 1957 4. The Income Tax Act, 1961 5. The Customs Act, 1962 6. The Gold (Control) Act, 1968 7. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 8. Companies Profits (Surtax) Act, 1964 9. The Gift Tax Act, 1958 10. The Export (Quality, Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 11. The Companies Act, 1956 12. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. xxx xxx xxx The 12 Central Acts. Referred to above are the following namely: 1. The Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 2. The Imports and Exports (Central) Act, 1947 3. The Wealth Tax Act, 1957 4. The Income Tax Act, 1961 5. The Customs Act, 1962 6. The Gold (Control) Act, 1968 7. The Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 8. Companies Profits (Surtax) Act, 1964 9. The Gift Tax Act, 1958 10. The Export (Quality, Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 11. The Companies Act, 1956 12. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. 4.Another notification dated 04.02.1985 bearing No. LAW 139 LCE 79 has been issued by the Government of Karnataka which reads thus: NOTIFICATION In exercise of the powers conferred by the Provision to Sub-Section (1) of Section 11 read with clause (1) of Section 2, and Section 13 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act. No. 2 of 1974) the Government of Karnataka, in consultation with the High Court of Karnataka, hereby makes the following amendment to the Notification No. LAW 196 LCE 79 dated 01.09.1982,namely : In the schedule to the said Notification after serial number 12, the following shall be inserted: “13. The Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 (Act No. 20 of 1966) 14. The Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (Act No.19 of 1952) 5.The Special Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class which has been established by the above notification dated 01.09.1982 for trial of offences under the Central Acts is specified in the schedule as having jurisdiction within the local areas of revenue district of Bengaluru including Bengaluru metropolitan areas. 6.The Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) (Central Board of Direct Taxes) has issued notification dated 11.10.2019 bearing No. 79/2019 under sub-Section (1) of Section 280-A of I.T. Act, 1961 designating the Special Court for the area mentioned in the said notification. Said notification reads thus: NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 11[th] October 2019, No. 79/2019 S.O. 3676(E). In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 280A of the Income –tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka, hereby designates the following Courts in the State of Karnataka, as mentioned in Column (2) of the table below, as Special Court, for the area mentioned in the corresponding entry in column (3) of the said table, namely:- 7.The offence for which the respondents – accused have been convicted are all under Chapter XXII of I.T. Act, 1961. The following provisions of said Chapter XXII deals with designating Courts of Magistrate First Class as Special Court, offences triable by Special Court, trial of offences as summons case and application of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to proceedings before Special Court, which reads thus: 280A.(1) The Central Government, in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, may, for trial of offences punishable under this Chapter, by notification, designate one or more courts of Magistrates of the first class as Special Court for such area or areas or for such cases or class or group of cases as may be specified in the notification. Explanation.- In this sub-section, “High Court” means the High Court of the State in which a Magistrate of first class designated as Special Court was functioning immediately before such designation. (2) While trying an offence under this Act, a Special Court shall also try an offence, other than an offence referred to in sub-section (1), with which the accused may, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (2 of 1974.) be charged at the same trial. Offences triable by Special Court. 280B. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (2 of 1974.)– Explanation.- In this sub-section, “High Court” means the High Court of the State in which a Magistrate of first class designated as Special Court was functioning immediately before such designation. (2) While trying an offence under this Act, a Special Court shall also try an offence, other than an offence referred to in sub-section (1), with which the accused may, under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (2 of 1974.) be charged at the same trial. Offences triable by Special Court. 280B. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (2 of 1974.)– (a) the offences punishable under this Chapter shall be triable only by the Special Court, if so designated, for the area or areas or for cases or class or group of cases, as the case may be, in which the offence has been committed: Provided that a court competent to try offences under section 292,– (i) which has been designated as a Special Court under this section, shall continue to try the offences before it or offences arising under this Act after such designation; (ii) which has not been designated as a Special Court may continue to try such offence pending before it till its disposal; (b) a Special Court may, upon a complaint made by an authority authorized in this behalf under this Act take cognizance of the offence for which the accused is committed for trial. Trial of offences as summons case. 280C. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Special Court, shall try, an offence under this Chapter punishable with imprisonment not exceeding two years or with fine or with both, as a summons case, and the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as applicable in the case of trial of summons case, shall apply accordingly. Application of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to proceedings before Special Court. 280D. (1) Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (including the provisions as to bails or bonds), shall apply to the proceedings before a Special Court and the person conducting the prosecution before the Special Court, shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor: Provided that the Central Government may also appoint for any case or class or group of cases a Special Public Prosecutor. (2) A person shall not be qualified to be appointed as a Public Prosecutor or a Special Public Prosecutor under this section unless he has been in practice as an advocate for not less than seven years, requiring special knowledge of law. (3) Every person appointed as a Public Prosecutor or a Special Public Prosecutor under this section shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor within the meaning of clause (u) of section 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the provisions of that Code shall have effect accordingly.” 8.Said provisions contained under Sections 280-A to 280-D of I.T. Act, 1961 are inserted by Finance Act 2012 with effect from 01.07.2012. Prior to the above said amendment and insertion of Section 280A, the notification dated 01.09.1982 was issued for establishing the Special Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class for trial of offences under 12 enactments and subsequently, 2 enactments were added by notification dated 04.02.1985. 9.Section 377 of Cr.P.C. came to be amended by Act No. 25/2005 with effect from 23.06.2006. Section 377 of Cr.P.C. as amended by Act No. 25/2005 reads thus: “377. Appeal by the State Government against sentence (1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), the Statement Government may, in any case of conviction on a trial held by any court other than a High Court, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy :- (a) to the Court of Session, if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate; and (b) to the High Court, if the sentence is passed by any other Court. 9.Section 377 of Cr.P.C. came to be amended by Act No. 25/2005 with effect from 23.06.2006. Section 377 of Cr.P.C. as amended by Act No. 25/2005 reads thus: “377. Appeal by the State Government against sentence (1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), the Statement Government may, in any case of conviction on a trial held by any court other than a High Court, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy :- (a) to the Court of Session, if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate; and (b) to the High Court, if the sentence is passed by any other Court. (2) If such conviction is in a case in which the offence has been investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment, constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (24 of 1946), or by any other agency empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than this Code, the Central Government may also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy- (a) to the Court of Session, if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate; and (b) to the High Court, if the sentence is passed by any other court. (3) When an appeal has been filed against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy, the Court of Session or, as the case may be, the High Court shall not enhance the sentence except after giving to the accused a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement and while showing cause, the accused may plead for his acquittal or for the reduction of the sentence. (4) … … …” 10.Section 377 of Cr.P.C. prior to amendment Act 25/2007 reads thus: “377. Appeal by the State Government against sentence.- (1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), the State Government may, in any case of conviction on a trial held by any Court other than a High Court, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy. (2) If such conviction is in a case in which the offence has been investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment, constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946), or by any other agency empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than this Code, the Central Government may also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy. (3) When an appeal has been filed against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy, the High Court shall not enhance the sentence except after giving to the accused a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement and while showing cause, the accused may plead for his acquittal or for the reduction of the sentence.” 11.Prior to amendment Act No. 25/2005 the High Court only had jurisdiction to entertain appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy. Subsequent to amendment of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C., appeal against the sentence on the ground of inadequacy is provided (a) to the Court of Sessions, if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate; and (b) to the High Court, if sentence is passed by any other Court. The object of the said amendment to sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C., is to permit the filing of an appeal in the Court of Sessions instead of the High Court on the ground of inadequacy of sentence passed by a Magistrate. 11.Prior to amendment Act No. 25/2005 the High Court only had jurisdiction to entertain appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy. Subsequent to amendment of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C., appeal against the sentence on the ground of inadequacy is provided (a) to the Court of Sessions, if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate; and (b) to the High Court, if sentence is passed by any other Court. The object of the said amendment to sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C., is to permit the filing of an appeal in the Court of Sessions instead of the High Court on the ground of inadequacy of sentence passed by a Magistrate. 12.Learned counsel for appellant would contend that the order of sentence has been passed by the Special Court for Economic Offences and it has to be considered as the sentence passed by `any other Court’ and appeals against inadequacy of sentence will lie to the High Court under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C. He contends that the Special Court for Economic Offences is not a Court of Magistrate and therefore, the appeal will not lie to the Court of Sessions under clause (a) of sub-section (1) or clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C. 13.Learned counsel for respondents – accused would contend that the appeals lie against the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by Magistrate to the Sessions Court under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. The respondents – accused have challenged the judgment of conviction and order on sentence by filing appeals before the Sessions Court under Section 374 of Cr.P.C. and they are pending before the Sessions Court. He submits that the Special Court for Economic Offences is presided over by a Judicial Magistrate First Class or Chief Judicial Magistrate and therefore, said Special Court does not come under the term `any other Court’ under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C. He contends that the order on sentence passed by the Special Court is the sentence passed by the Magistrate and an appeal lies to the Court of Sessions under clause (a) of sub-section (1) or clause (a) of sub-section (2) of Section 377 of Cr.P.C. He submits that if the appeal has been tried against the conviction by the Sessions Court and if the appeal is dealt by the High Court against inadequacy of sentence there may be conflicting judgments. 14.Learned counsel for appellant has not cited any decisions on the point urged by him. 15.I came across an unreported decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of R. Raja Rao, Income Tax Officer Vs. M/s. Skyline Constructions Ltd. And another, rendered in Crl.A. No. 1420/2003dated 30.01.2009. In the said decision the coordinate Bench has considered similar point urged by the learned counsel for appellant and observed thus: “8. Though at the first look it could be said that the contention of the learned counsel may be right as the decision in question is on a trial conducted by the magistrate, but on a close examination of records, it is noticed that the impugned decision is rendered, no doubt, by a magistrate presiding over the Special Court of Economic Offences. It admits of no doubt that in any case of conviction by any court other than a High Court, the State Government may direct an appeal to be filed before the High Court on the ground of inadequacy of sentence. The legislative intent in incorporating it makes the position different. Sub-section (2) provides an appeal to the High Court if the sentence is passed by any other court. This undoubtedly excludes the magistrate as covered under clause (a). “8. Though at the first look it could be said that the contention of the learned counsel may be right as the decision in question is on a trial conducted by the magistrate, but on a close examination of records, it is noticed that the impugned decision is rendered, no doubt, by a magistrate presiding over the Special Court of Economic Offences. It admits of no doubt that in any case of conviction by any court other than a High Court, the State Government may direct an appeal to be filed before the High Court on the ground of inadequacy of sentence. The legislative intent in incorporating it makes the position different. Sub-section (2) provides an appeal to the High Court if the sentence is passed by any other court. This undoubtedly excludes the magistrate as covered under clause (a). 9. The question would be, which are these other courts referred to in clause (b). The Code of Criminal Procedure identifies three categories of courts-court of judicial magistrate, court of metropolitan magistrate and court of sessions. Another category of courts is nomenclatured as Special Courts as may be notified by the State Government. For ascertainment about the origin of Special Courts for Economic Offences, I had directed the registry to place the notification, if any, by virtue of which such courts are constituted. In response to such direction, on 14.8.2008 registry has placed on record a Government Order bearing No.LAW:106:LCE: 79 BANGALORE dated 1.9.1982, preamble of which reads thus: xxx xxx (referred in paragraph No. 3, supra) 10. Under that notification, the Special Court for Economic Offences came to be established in Bangalore with effect from 20.10.1987 as seen from the notification. Therefore, it is clear that on conviction of an accused in a trial before the Special Court for Economic offences, though the rank of the presiding officer is shown of the cadre of Civil Judge (Junior Division), discharging the duties and powers of a magistrate within the meaning of Cr.P.C., but in view of conferment of special jurisdiction to try cases relating to economic offences under twelve enactments referred therein, it s ‘Special court’. Therefore, I have no hesitation to conclude that the words appearing in clause(b), ‘any other court’ brings within its sweep ’Special Courts’, even though they may be presided over by the officer of the rank of a magistrate. In this view of the matter, in a case of conviction of the a