NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph โ€” Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

CRL.M.C./4953/2017 of KARAN LUTHRA Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2024-05-09
Case number
4953/2017

Parties

Cited by (1)

Counts citations resolved within this build's own ingested judgment corpus. The true corpus-wide count will be higher until more of the corpus is ingested.

Cites (0 resolved of 1 detected)

1 case citation detected in this judgment's own text, but none resolved to a judgment page in this build yet.

Statutes cited (3)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 4953/2017 & CRL.M.A. 19649/2017

KARAN LUTHRA ..... Petitioner

Through: Mr. Rajiv Dewan and Mr. Angad Singh, Advs. Singh, Advs. versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER

..... Respondent

Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, Sr. SC with Ms. Hemlata Rawat and Mr. Virendra Kumar Saksena, Jr. SCs Hemlata Rawat and Mr. Virendra Kumar Saksena, Jr. SCs

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJANO R R09.05.2024

1.The present petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 28.10.2017 whereby the revision preferred by the present petitioner against the order of summoning was dismissed.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was summoned to stand the trial for an offence under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Section 181 IPC in complaint case filed by the Income Tax Department.

3.He submits that during the pendency of the present proceedings an order under Section 279(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been passed compounding the offence under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In support of his contention, the attention of the Court has been drawn to the order dated 03.03.2023 passed by the Director General of Income Tax (Inv.),

Delhi.

4.He further submits that the compounding charges of Rs. 93,66,800/- also stands deposited.

5.The above position is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent / Department.

6.In view of the above, the present petition has been rendered infructuous and the same is disposed of as such.

MAY 9, 2024N.S. ASWAL

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J