Crl.p/664/2016 Of Megacity (Bangalore Builders & Developers v. The Income Tax Department
High Court
04 Jan 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · karnataka_bng_old
Parties
Crl.p/664/2016 Of Megacity (Bangalore Builders & Developers v. The Income Tax Department
Date of order
04 Jan 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Crl.p/664/2016 Of Megacity (Bangalore Builders & Developers v. The Income Tax Department, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Hence, the present petition is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 04 DAY OF JANUARY 2017
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.664 OF 2016
BETWEEN:
1. Megacity (Bangalore) Builders and Developers, No.120, Mega Tower, K.H.Road, Bangalore – 560 027. Represented by its Director- Sri. C.P.Gangadhareshwara. Builders and Developers, No.120, Mega Tower, K.H.Road, Bangalore – 560 027. Represented by its Director- Sri. C.P.Gangadhareshwara.
2. Shri C.P.Yogeshwara, Managing Director, Megacity (Bangalore) Builders and Developers, Son of Puttamadegowda, Aged 52 years, No.367, 1[st] “E” Cross, 7[th] Block, Banashankari 3[rd] State, Bangalore 560 085. Managing Director, Megacity (Bangalore) Builders and Developers, Son of Puttamadegowda, Aged 52 years, No.367, 1[st] “E” Cross, 7[th] Block, Banashankari 3[rd] State, Bangalore 560 085.
…PETITIONERS
(By Shri Kiran S. Javali, Advocate)
AND:
The Income Tax Department, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 1(4), C.R.Buildings, Bangalore – 560 001. By Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik.
…RESPONDENT
(By Shri Jeevan Neeralagi, Advocate)
*****
This Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to set aside the order dated 21.10.2015 in C.C.No.51/2012 on the file of the Special Court (Economic Offences) Bangalore and allow the application filed under Section 91 read with Section 243(2) of Cr.P.C.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the court made the following:
O R D E R
In view of the petition in Crl.P.1997/2016 having been
allowed, the corresponding petition, namely Crl.P.664/2016 is rendered infructuous.
Hence, the present petition is dismissed. I.A.1/2016 is
disposed of as a consequence.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KS
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.
EaseValue