Krishna Das Agrawal Son Of Shri Ranchod Das Agrawal, Agedabout 80 Years, Resident Of D v. Deputy Director Income Tax( Investigation ), Sri Ganganagar(Head Quarter Jaipur
High Court
05 Feb 2019 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Krishna Das Agrawal Son Of Shri Ranchod Das Agrawal, Agedabout 80 Years, Resident Of D v. Deputy Director Income Tax( Investigation ), Sri Ganganagar(Head Quarter Jaipur
Date of order
05 Feb 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Krishna Das Agrawal Son Of Shri Ranchod Das Agrawal, Agedabout 80 Years, Resident Of D v. Deputy Director Income Tax( Investigation ), Sri Ganganagar(Head Quarter Jaipur, the High Court (2019) dismissed the appeal under Section 277 of the Income-tax Act. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: As prayed, present petition is dismissed as withdrawn withliberty, as aforesaid.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5721/2018
Krishna Das Agrawal Son Of Shri Ranchod Das Agrawal, AgedAbout 80 Years, Resident Of D-1, Nandanam- 02, Tilak Marg, CScheme, Jaipur. At Present Resident Of Flat No. B-302, OramTrimurti, Tilak Marg, C Scheme, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
Deputy Director Income Tax( Investigation ), Sri Ganganagar(Head Quarter Jaipur)
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.R. BajwaFor Respondent(s): Ms. Tanvi Sahay
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Order
05/02/2019
Learned counsel for the petitioner, having argued the matterat some length, has made an alternative prayer. He urged thatsince qua same facts two different complaints have been filed bysame complainant, the said two complaints should be clubbed andtried as one.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on identicalfacts, complaint (Annx.2) was filed by Deputy Director, IncomeTax (Investigation), Sri Ganganagar (Headquarter, Jaipur) foroffence under Section 277(i) of Income Tax Act, 1961. It iscontended that another complaint was filed for prosecution underSection 50 of Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets)and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. Learned counsel contends that inboth the complaints facts are identical. Learned counsel submits
that same witnesses are to be examined in both the complaints. Itis submitted that if witnesses are examined at different times,strategy and tenor of cross-examination shall be known to thewitnesses and they may in second complaint plug the loopholes.
Ms. Tanvi Sahay, learned counsel for respondent, hassubmitted that prayer made by the learned counsel for thepetitioner during the course of arguments has not been pleaded inpresent petition and therefore, appropriate reply thereto could not
be filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the presentpetition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner tofile a better petition ventilating the grievances unfolded during thecourse of arguments.
As prayed, present petition is dismissed as withdrawn withliberty, as aforesaid.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J
Govind/
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.