Rakesh Agarwal v. Union Of India, Thru. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Tds Lko

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8663 of 2025 Rakesh Agarwal .....Applicant(s) Versus Union Of India, Thru. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Tds Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s):Amarjeet Singh Rakhra, Bashisth Muni Mishra, Yash ShuklaCounsel for Opposite Party(s) :Kushagra Dikshit Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neerav Chitravanshi along with Sri Kushagra Dikshit, learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. This application has been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 15.9.2025 and 15.7.2025 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow. 3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that Complaint Case no.1088 of 2018 was filed by the Union of India against M/s. Chinttpurni Engineering Works (P) Ltd. and three others under Section 276(B) read with Section 278(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with the allegation that M/s. Chinttpurni Engineering Works (P) Ltd. had deducted tax at source for the financial years 2015-16, however, it failed to credit the same with the Central Government within the prescribed time. Sri Rakesh Kumar Agarwal has been arrayed as an accused in the aforesaid complaint for the reason that he along with two others were the Directors of M/s. Chinttpurni Engineering Works (P) Ltd. when the said offence/incident took place. Sri Rakesh Kumar Agarwal has surrendered before the court and had applied for bail and his bail was granted vide order dated 11.7.2024. He was attending the proceedings regularly through his counsel. However, due to poor health, he could not stay in touch with his counsel and the impugned order dated 15.7.2025 was passed i.e. N.B.W. straightaway and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. simultaneously. It has been submitted that the applicant is 70 years old and is under treatment for Lumbar PIVD with Degenerative Disc Disease and Lumbar Spondylosis. His MRI scan dated 24.01.2025 along with the prescription of Dr. Apoorva Kumar, Consultant Neuro & Spine Surgeon, clearly evidences diffuse disc bulges at L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1 levels with nerve root compression, along with disc desiccation and marginal osteophytes at multiple levels. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants, in nutshell, submits that both the impugned orders have been passed simultaneously. He submits that the applicant is 70 years old and is ready to cooperate in the proceedings, but in the meantime, impugned orders may not be given effect to. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the application and has submitted that the applicant had not participated in the proceedings, therefore, the court below was right in its approach to pass the orders impugned. However, he submits that the applicant may be directed to cooperate in the proceedings. 6. After going through the record, it is evident that the order dated 15.7.2025 is not sustainable for the reason that on the same date, N.B.W. has been issued and Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings have also been directed to be instituted against the applicants. 7. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby set aside the impugned orders dated 15.9.2025 and 15.7.2025 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow. The applicant will appear before the court concerned on the next date as has been fixed by the court below. He will cooperate in the proceedings and will not take unnecessary adjournments. 8. The application stands disposed of. October 10, 2025Sachin (Brij Raj Singh,J.)