Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
- 1 -
NC: 2024:KHC:28101 CRL.A No. 1206 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1206 OF 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-560032 …APPELLANT (BY SRI. SANMATHI E I., ADVOCATE) AND:
M/S SOWPARNIKA PROJECTS AND INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED NO.750, C-BLOCK, 1 AND 5 MAIN ROAD, ACES LYAOUT, KUNDANAHALLI, BANGALORE-560036 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI SUBRAMANINAN SREENIVASAN …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ANNAMALAI S., ADVOCATE)
THIS CRL.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 377 OF Cr.P.C. PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE FINE AMOUNT IN C.C.NO.52/2019 BY THE SPL.COURT FOR ECONOMIC OFFENCES AT BENGALURU DATED 28.10.2020AND ETC.
Digitally signed by LAKSHMINARAYANA MURTHY RAJASHRI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
NC: 2024:KHC:28101 CRL.A No. 1206 of 2021
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the Income Tax Department against the inadequacy of the sentence dated 28.10.2020 passed in C.C. No. 52/2019 by Special Court for Economic Offences, Bengaluru. 2. Heard learned counsel for appellant on maintainability the of appeal. 3. Maintainability of the appeal had come for consideration before this Court in the case of The Income Tax Department Vs. M/s. Jenious Clothing Private Limited and another, Crl.A. No. 2104/2023 and connected matters decided on 12.07.2024 wherein this Court considering the relevant details has held that the appeal filed by the Income Tax Department against the inadequacy of sentence is not maintainable. For the reasons stated in the judgment referred to supra, the present appeal is also not maintainable. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. Liberty is given to the appellant – Income
- 3 -
NC: 2024:KHC:28101 CRL.A No. 1206 of 2021
Tax Department to present the appeal before the jurisdictional Sessions Court within a period of two months from the date of this judgment. It is made clear that period which has been spent before this Court will not come in the way for considering the period of limitation, if the appeal is filed before the jurisdictional Sessions Court within the time noted supra.
Sd/- JUDGE
LRS List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1