Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.