Dismissed

M/s Srinivasa Building and Developers and 2 others v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC21 Sept 2022CRLP/2440/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings against partnership firm accused of wilful default in paying self-assessment tax. The court held that since there are triable issues, the relief cannot be granted.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition filed for quashing proceedings under Section 276C(2) IT Act is dismissed.

M/s Srinivasa Building and Developers and 2 others Vs The… — Money Laundering | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

, I l l

¶2

[^320s ]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGAT.IA AT HYDERABA.D

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF SEPTEI/IBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2440 OF 2022

¶8

Between:

¶9

NI/s Srinivasa Building and Developers and 2 others, Having its office , Plot No.121, Telecom Nagar, Gachibowli, Hyderabad Represented by its Patner Mr. Katakam Srinivas.

¶10

Mr. Katakam Srinivas, S/o. Anjaiah, Ala. 57, Occ. Nil , R/o.5-5-39, Gandhi Chowk, Siricilla - 505301.

¶11

Smt. Katakam Vanaja, W/o. K.Srinivas, Ala. 54, Occ.Nil Rl/o. 5-5-39, Gandhi Chowk, Siricilla - 505301.

¶12

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED No.1,2&4

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana and another, Rep. by PP., High Court, Hyderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENT NO.1

¶16

The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle -8 (1 ), Room No. 605, 6th Floor, Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad.

¶17

...RESPONDENT NO.2/COMPLAINANTS

¶18

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against Petitioners/Accused in CC No.39 of 20'lB on the file of the Hon'ble Vlll Additional Magistrate Session Judge, Spl. Judge for EO Cases, Hyderabad.

¶19

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2022

¶20

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the Petitioners/Accused in CC No.39 of 2018 on the file of the Hon'ble Vlll Additional

¶21

-7

¶22

Magistrate Session J rdge, Spl. Judge for EO Cases, HyderaL:td, pending hearing of main Criminal Petilion.

¶23

This Petition r oming on for hearing, upon perusing tirr,: lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri A L RAJU, Advocate for the Pet tioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor (Tt3) on behalf of the Respondent No 1 and of Sri NARASIMHA SHARIUA, Adrzocate for the Respondent No.2. S( lT for SDIT.SRINIVAS.

¶24

The Court made the 'ollowing: ORDER

¶25

THE HON'BLE DT.JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶26

CRIMINAL PETITION No.244O OF 2022

¶27

ORDER:-

¶28

Seeking the Court to quash the proceedings that are pending against the petitioners in C.C.No.39 of 2O18, on the file of the Court of Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad, the present criminal petition is fiIed.

¶29

Heard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri P.Narasimha Sharma, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department.

¶30

The matrk of the case as narrated in the complaint is that, the 1st petitioner is a partnership firm which is engaged in the real estate business. Petitioner Nos.2, 3 and other accused are -the partners of the firm and they are responsible for the day- to- day affairs of the firm. The firm Iiled return of income for the Assessment yea:. 2O73-2014 without paying self-assessment tax. It filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2013-2014 declaring the total income as Rs.54,42,4O0/-. It failed to pay the self assessment tax of Rs. L4,66,238/-. It has wilfully defaulted

¶31

¶32

Dt.CSL! ti t.P.N<'-2440 ol2022

¶33

in pal,nren - o1' self-assessment tax as reqtr:retl under Section L4CA income Tax Act.

¶34

Matir g his submission that the petitiont:r's have not committed rny acts of wilful default, learnec^(roLLnsel for the petitior rers contended that the income 'wh ich was declared b y accused No.6, was not knoivn to the petitioners. Tl-re petitioners approached thr respondent and reque: ted to give breakup. Breakulr w:ts given demanding lhe petitioners to pay 4OVo of the a:rrount which comes to Rs.9,80,095/-. Out of the sz.;<1 ,1mount, Rs.2,0O,00C /- ',vas paid in the month of Augr.:;t. 2(1 16 and the remaini rg amount was paid in the month^,rf December. Thus, no ar rour-rt was evaded. But without corrsidering the payments, prosecution was launched anc th us, the proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶35

Per cc ntra, the learned Standing Counse l suibmitted that the pet itioners failed to pay the self-asses:irnent tax of Rs.14,66,238,/- on the admitted income a-nc no reason, whatsoever, is assigned. Learned Standing Cor-trLse. further states that vhen there is wilful default in pay r: en1. of selfassessment tax on admitted income, Section 2'7 6C('.2) of the

I t

0 0

Dt.CSL,J Crl.P.No.2440 oI 2022

¶40

Income Tax Act comes into play. Learned counsel further submits that no reasons, whatsoever, are assigned for nonpayment of advance tax and therefore, the prosecution is launched on obtaining necessary sanction and hence, the proceedings have to be continued.

¶41

Making a submission that where there is no wilful default, the provision referred by the learned Standing counsel cannot come into play learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision reported in S.P.Velagutham Vs. The Assistant Commisstoner of Income Tax Non-Corporate Circle- 74(7)1

¶42

Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that 4Oo/o of the self-assessment tax was paid. But the learned Standing Counsel states that no amount is paid. Thus, the contentions and rival contentions have to be put on trial and thereafter, a decision has to be arrived at with regard to the guilt or otherwise of the petitioners. As of now, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings. Further, triable issues are found. Hence, this Court is of the view that the relief sought for cannot be granted.

¶43

'N,tnNu/rN/oags/zozz

¶44

¶45

Ot.CSL,t (tl,P.No.2440 oI 2022

¶46

¶47

8 Result u'rtl.y, the Criminal petition is dism: s;sed.

¶48

9 As a s :quel thereto, miscellaneous petitiors pending, if any, shali stand closed.

¶49

SD/- G. SIREESHA ASSI !; AT'IT REGISTRAR