D.N. Sood Vs. Ito

D.N. Sood vs ito

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Apr 30, 2003

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/707682

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/707682
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Apr 30, 2003
Case Number: Crl. M.M. No. 1756 of 2003 30 April 2003
Subject: Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

D.N. Sood

Advocate Geetha Luthra, for the assessed; Avdesh Singh and; Santosh

Respondent

ito

Legal References

Reported In: [2003]131TAXMAN304(Delhi)

Excerpt

- .....on the part of their counsel to inform the petitioners to appear in person that they could not appear before the learned trial court. it is pointed out that earlier the petitioners were exempted from personal attendance and were appearing through their counsel. the counsel representing them however omitted to inform them of the order that their personal attendance was required in the court. the petitioners are prepared to appear before the learned trial court.3. since the purpose of proceedings under sections 82 and 83 of cr. p.c. is simply to secure the presence of the petitioners before the court, in view of their undertaking to attend the learned trial court in person, the order issuing process under sections 82 and 83 of cr. p.c. is liable to be set aside. the petitioners are directed to appear in person before the learned trial court within two weeks and until then they shall not be arrested for being produced before the learned trial court in execution of any warrant of arrest or otherwise. they shall continue to be on previous bail and notices under section 446 of cr. p.c. issued to their respective sureties shall stand recalled. the petitioners shall be at liberty to make application seeking exemption from personal attendance on the dates of hearing and in the event of such an application being made, the learned trial court shall consider the same on merits and grant exemption if the personal attendance of the petitioners is otherwise not required for progress of the trial.4. the petition stands disposed of in these terms.

Full Judgment

ORDER

By an order dated 10-4-2003 proceedings under sections 82 and 83 of Cr. P.C. were directed to be initiated against the petitioners and notices under section 446 Cr. P.C. were directed to be issued to their respective sureties. That order is being assailed on behalf of the petitioner by way the present petition. It is noticed that the petitioners have not been appearing before the learned trial court for a period of about three years and consequently in order to secure their presence, processes under sections 82 and 83 of Cr. P.C. were directed to be issued against them.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it was on account of fault on the part of their counsel to inform the petitioners to appear in person that they could not appear before the learned trial court. It is pointed out that earlier the petitioners were exempted from personal attendance and were appearing through their counsel. The counsel representing them however omitted to inform them of the order that their personal attendance was required in the court. The petitioners are prepared to appear before the learned trial court.

3. Since the purpose of proceedings under sections 82 and 83 of Cr. P.C. is simply to secure the presence of the petitioners before the court, in view of their undertaking to attend the learned trial court in person, the order issuing process under sections 82 and 83 of Cr. P.C. is liable to be set aside. The petitioners are directed to appear in person before the learned trial court within two weeks and until then they shall not be arrested for being produced before the learned trial court in execution of any warrant of arrest or otherwise. They shall continue to be on previous bail and notices under section 446 of Cr. P.C. Issued to their respective sureties shall stand recalled. The petitioners shall be at liberty to make application seeking exemption from personal attendance on the dates of hearing and in the event of such an application being made, the learned trial court shall consider the same on merits and grant exemption if the personal attendance of the petitioners is otherwise not required for progress of the trial.

4. The petition stands disposed of in these terms.

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2003 Same Parties D.N. Sood vs ito Same Subject Direct Taxation

Direct Taxation