Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Suit for malicious prosecution against government authorities is...
Malicious prosecution suit against government authorities barred for late notice, overruling HC's view. Notice must precede limitation expiry per precedents.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Suit for malicious prosecution against government authorities is barred by limitation as notice u/s 80 CPC was issued after expiry of limitation period, contrary to rulings in Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Puri v. Gangaram Chhapolia and State of Gujarat v. Kothari and Associates, which mandate notice before limitation expires. High Court's view declaring suit maintainable is set aside and quashed, with declaration that suit is time-barred.
Suit for malicious prosecution against government authorities is barred by limitation as notice u/s 80 CPC was issued after expiry of limitation period, contrary to rulings in Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Puri v. Gangaram Chhapolia and State of Gujarat v. Kothari and Associates, which mandate notice before limitation expires. High Court's view declaring suit maintainable is set aside and quashed, with declaration that suit is time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.