SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 40612

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, J
G.SANTHOSH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
C.S.MANU, A.RAJESH, SPL.PP VACAB

ORDER

Whether an Assistant Commissioner of the Sales Tax Department, who passes an order of assessment of tax under the Kerala Value Added Tax Act , 2003 (for short 'the KVAT Act'), is entitled to get the protection envisaged under the Judges (Protection) Act , 1985? Answer to this question would decide the fate of this application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973 (for short 'the Code').

2. The petitioner was the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Commercial Taxes, Thrissur. He is the first accused in the case C.C.No.6/2020 on the file of the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thrissur. The second accused in the case was the Managing Director of the company by name M/s.Nano Excel Enterprises Private Limited. The third accused in the case is the Sales Tax Practitioner who had allegedly acted as a mediator between the first and the second accused. The offences alleged against the accused in the case are punishable under Section 13 (1)(d) read with 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988 (for short 'the PC Act') and also under Sections 465 , 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code .

3. As per a letter dated 25.06.2011, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top