TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an order of forfeiture under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1961 is valid when it merely recites the statutory language and does not state the factual grounds on which the Government formed its opinion.
Analysis: The statutory requirement that the notification must state the grounds of the Government's opinion means that the order must disclose the factual basis or conclusions of fact on which the opinion rests. A bare repetition of the statutory formula does not amount to stating grounds. The requirement is analogous to other provisions that protect liberty or property by insisting that the authority communicate the factual basis of its satisfaction, and the disclosed material must indicate what in the publication offended the statute, such as the offending map, text, or other specific matter.
Conclusion: The forfeiture order was invalid because it stated only the Government's opinion and not the grounds for that opinion.
Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded, the High Court's judgment was set aside, the Government's forfeiture order was quashed, and the appellant was entitled to return of the forfeited books.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute requires the authority to state the grounds of its opinion, the order must disclose the factual basis of the satisfaction reached and not merely reproduce the statutory language or the conclusion itself.
TaxTMI 
