High Court for the State of Telangana · Judgments and reasoned final orders
M/s. Sreemitra Township Pvt. Ltd. & Mr. M. V. Chowdary v. The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ward-2(2), Hyderabad & Anr.
Criminal Petition No. 10364 of 2018 ·
TDS prosecution in C.C. No. 150 of 2017 before Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad: section 482 CrPC quash petition disposed of with liberty to pursue pending compounding petitions under section 279(2).
1. FACTS OF THE CASE
M/s. Sreemitra Township Pvt. Ltd. and its Director M. V. Chowdary filed Criminal Petition No. 10364 of 2018 under section 482 CrPC to quash TDS criminal prosecution proceedings in C.C. No. 150 of 2017 on the file of the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad instituted by the ITO (TDS), Ward-2(2), Hyderabad. During the pendency of the quash petition and interim stay, the petitioners applied for compounding of the offences, which remained pending due to the pendency of the High Court petition.
2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT
Recording the submission of petitioners' counsel that the alleged TDS offences are compoundable and that compounding petitions had been kept pending solely because the section 482 CrPC quash petition was pending before the High Court, the Single Judge permitted the parties to pursue compounding.
3. JUDICIAL DECISION
Disposed of Criminal Petition No. 10364 of 2018 granting liberty to the parties to seek compounding of the offences before the concerned Court/authority.
4. OUTCOME
Assessee (procedural liberty) - Criminal petition disposed of granting liberty to pursue compounding of the TDS offences before the concerned authority/Court.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
AKHB analysis: where a section 482 CrPC stay order blocks processing of a TDS compounding application in a pending Economic Offences prosecution, disposing of the quash petition with express compounding liberty clears the procedural bottleneck.
Source and verification
4-page official High Court for the State of Telangana judgment PDF (20250219_HBHC010729732018.pdf).
Original PDF: 4 pages · SHA-256: 12ebd0b1aa68e8d1de6edd1fdea042ca48e2ae564e090a44be5c664190050484
Supplied source-reviewed note retained; original bytes and identity validation checked in this release. Substantive re-review is not claimed for this record.
Applies TDS prosecution compounding principles under section 279(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and section 482 CrPC. Income-tax Act, 2025 equivalence is not verified.
Full primary judgment PDF read page-by-page and verified against the AKHB Google Drive repository. Comprehensive subsequent judicial treatment has not been independently verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
AI-assisted source review. Independent human approval is not represented.
General research only. Read the complete judgment and verify applicable law and subsequent treatment before reliance.