Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Inadvertent error by bank officials ignoring restraint orders led to FIR against bank officials for offences under IPC provisions. Continuation of criminal proceedings questioned. Held: FIR did not show bank induced anyone fraudulently or dishonestly, lacking mens rea required for offences u/ss 420, 406, 409, 462 IPC. No entrustment of property misappropriated by bank. Sections 206, 217, 201 IPC requiring mens rea not applicable. No common intention or cooperation by bank in alleged offences, hence Sections 34, 37, 120B IPC inapplicable. Case falls under categories exempting quashing per Bhajan Lal case. Continuation would cause undue hardship. High Court order quashed.
Inadvertent error by bank officials ignoring restraint orders led to FIR against bank officials for offences under IPC provisions. Continuation of criminal proceedings questioned. Held: FIR did not show bank induced anyone fraudulently or dishonestly, lacking mens rea required for offences u/ss 420, 406, 409, 462 IPC. No entrustment of property misappropriated by bank. Sections 206, 217, 201 IPC requiring mens rea not applicable. No common intention or cooperation by bank in alleged offences, hence Sections 34, 37, 120B IPC inapplicable. Case falls under categories exempting quashing per Bhajan Lal case. Continuation would cause undue hardship. High Court order quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
