1995 (6) TMI 189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 1995 have been filed on behalf of Vasishta Industries whereas the rest of the petitions have been filed by the petitioner in his individual capacity. 3.. The firm Vasishta Industries and D.S. Jayaram are assessees under the KST Act. The respondent has filed charge-sheets against them for non-filing of monthly statements in form No. 3 as required under section 12(B)(1) of the KST Act and the Rules thereunder. 4.. Since the petitioner in all these cases is the same and the complaints filed by the respondent in respect of different periods of non-filing of statements of turnover in form No. 3 and as common questions of law arises in these petitions, I have heard them together and am passing a common order. 5.. Sri K. Suman, learned couns .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oubt, in the said judgment it has been held that section 468(2)(a), Cr.P.C. is applicable even to the proceedings arising under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act. Apparently, Act No. 10 of 1982 must have gone unnoticed by the learned Judge when he rendered the above decision. 8.. Section 2 of Karnataka Act No. 10 of 1982 reads thus: "2. Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, not to apply to certain offences.-Nothing in Chapter XXXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Central Act 2 of 1974), shall apply to,- (i) any offence punishable under any of the enactments specified in the Schedule; or (ii) any other offences which under the provisions of that Code, may be tried along with such offences, and every offence referr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ontrol Order, 1949 after lapse of 22 years. The reasonable time within which action will have to be commenced depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. In the instant case, the alleged offences being economic offences and as the bar under Chapter XXXVI of Cr.P.C., for taking cognizance of the alleged offences under the KST Act after lapse of the period of limitation has been removed by Act 10 of 1982, it is difficult to accept that the proceedings have been initiated against the accused in an unreasonable manner or beyond reasonable time. 11.. As regards the last submission of Sri Suman, the question whether the petitioner incurred substantial loss on account of fire accident and that the factory has not been working, etc., are .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X