Bombay High Court
WP/584/2004 of A.G.KARKHANIS Vs UNION OF INDIA and ORS. on 22 December 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.584 OF 2004CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.584 OF
..(1)..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYCRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.584 OF 2004
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.584 OF 2004
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.584 OF 2004
A.G.Karkhanis ...Petitioner
Versus
Union of India
and 4 Ors. ...Respondents.
....
Mr.Vasant Kotwal, Senior Advocate i/b. Shaunak Satpute & Co. for the Petitioner.
Mr.J.C.Satpute, Counsel for Respondent No.1-U.O.I.
Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, APP, for the State.
....
CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.
CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.
DATED : DECEMBER 22, 2006.
DATED : DECEMBER 22, 2006.
P.C.:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Mr.Kotwal, the learned Senior
Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr.Satpute, the learned Counsel for Respondent No.1-Union of India, and Mrs.Deshmukh, the learned APP for the State.
2. The Petitioner is seeking quashing of Criminal Case Nos.S/887 to S/918 wherein he was an accused. The said cases were pending before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
..(2)..
47th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai. The said cases are under Section 276B read with Section 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner states that during pendency of the present Petition, the assessee company made an application dated 29.06.2005 to the Office of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Mumbai requesting for compounding of the offence. Admittedly, the fees for compounding has been paid. Mr.Satpute, the learned Counsel for Union of India admits that pursuant to the said application, the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Mumbai vide order dated 8th May, 2006, in exercise of powers under Section 279(2) of the Income Tax Act, compounded the offence punishable under Section 276B read with Section 278B of the Income Tax Act.
4. In view of this fact, nothing survives in the complaints and hence the pending criminal cases stand quashed.
5. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.
..(3)..
(SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)
(SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)
(SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)