Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2013 (4) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2013 (4) TMI 135 - HC - Indian Laws


Issues:
1. Quashing of impugned orders passed by Additional Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court.
2. Transfer of shares from Demat Account of accused to petitioner's Demat Account.
3. Dispute over ownership of shares and misappropriation allegations.
4. Role of Income Tax Department in the investigation and inquiry.
5. Relief sought by the petitioner under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

Issue 1: Quashing of Impugned Orders:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226/227 to quash orders passed by the Additional Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Surat. The orders directed the transfer of shares from the accused's Demat Account to the petitioner's account. The petitioner sought relief to set aside these orders.

Issue 2: Transfer of Shares:
The petitioner, a Share Investment and Sub-Broker, alleged that the accused misused trust by transferring shares to his wife's Demat Account instead of clients' accounts. The investigating officer seized shares and documents as Muddamal. The petitioner requested the transfer of these shares to his account. The Income Tax Department conducted an inquiry and found no further action warranted against the petitioner under the Income Tax Act.

Issue 3: Ownership Dispute and Misappropriation Allegations:
The petitioner alleged misappropriation by the accused and filed a complaint under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The accused transferred shares to his wife's account and sold some from another account. The Income Tax Department confirmed that the misappropriated shares were reflected in the petitioner's accounts and some clients confirmed purchasing shares through the petitioner.

Issue 4: Role of Income Tax Department:
The Income Tax Department conducted an inquiry and found no further action necessary against the petitioner under the Income Tax Act. The Department confirmed that misappropriated shares were reflected in the petitioner's accounts and some clients verified purchasing shares through the petitioner.

Issue 5: Relief Sought under Article 226/227:
The petitioner sought relief to quash the impugned orders and transfer the misappropriated shares to his Demat Account. The Court allowed the petition, quashed the orders, and directed the transfer of shares to the petitioner's account. The petitioner was required to seek permission before transferring any shares during the trial's conclusion.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the legal judgment, addressing the quashing of orders, ownership dispute, role of the Income Tax Department, and the relief sought by the petitioner under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates