V.k.sasikala v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii (2), Chennai β 600 034
High Court
20 Jul 2018 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court Β· hc_cis_mas
Parties
V.k.sasikala v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii (2), Chennai β 600 034
Date of order
20 Jul 2018
Assessment year(s)
β
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In V.k.sasikala v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-Ii (2), Chennai β 600 034, the High Court (2018) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Decision: 8.Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed asinfructuous.
Summary auto-generated from the order below β read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order β as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 13.07.2018Pronounced on : 20.07.2018CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.No.24479 of 2004andCrl.M.P.No.7975 of 2004
V.K.Sasikala ... Petitioner/Accused Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II (2), Chennai β 600 034. ... Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the recordspertaining to E.O.C.C.No.194 of 1997 pending trial on the fileof the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court [EconomicOffences-I], Egmore, Chennai, so as to quash the same.
For Petitioner: Mr.S.Venkatesh
For Respondent: Mr.Murali Krishnan,
Special Public Prosecutor (Income Tax Cases)O R D E R
This Criminal Original Petition is filed to call for therecords pertaining to E.O.C.C.No.194 of 1997 pending trial onthe file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court[Economic Offences-I], Egmore, Chennai, so as to quash the same.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner and the SpecialPublic Prosecutor appearing for the Income Tax Departmentappeared.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner filed a memostating that by order dated 08.01.2015, the Trial Court hadallowed the respondent/complainant to withdraw the complaint.In pursuant to the above the complaint was withdrawn and nothingsurvives for adjudication.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
4.In support of his contention, the learned counsel for thepetitioner had filed an order passed by the Additional ChiefMetropolitan Magistrate [Economic Offences-I], Egmore, Chennai,made in E.O.C.C.No.194 of 1997 dated 08.01.2015.
5.On a perusal of the same, it is seen that the learnedSpecial Publlic Prosecutor of the Income Tax Department hadfiled a petition in Crl.M.P.No.45 of 2015 to withdraw theprosecution against the petitioner and given a consent towithdraw the prosecution.
6.The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for theIncome Tax Department had filed a communication dated 27.02.2015of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Judicial and Prosecution),Chennai addressed to the Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-2,Chennai, concurring the same.
7.Recording the submission, the Lower Court had ordered thatE.O.C.C.No.194 of 1997 is ordered to be withdrawn. In view ofthe above, the prayer in this Criminal Original Petition becomesinfructuous.
8.Hence, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed asinfructuous. Consequently, the connected MiscellaneousPetition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ah
To
1.The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate [Economic Offences-I], Egmore, Chennai.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-II (2), Chennai β 600 034.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.S.Venkatesh, Advocate Sr.48985
+1cc to Mr.L.P.Shanmugasundaram, Advocate Sr.49029
Crl.O.P.No.24479 of 2004nmI[co]srg 2/8/2018
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 β not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CAβclient 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.