<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (2) TMI 216 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210686</link>
    <description>Section 482 CrPC remains available in exceptional cases despite the bar on a second revision under Section 397(3), where intervention is needed to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice; the petition was therefore maintainable in principle. At the charge-framing stage, the court need only assess whether the material gives rise to strong suspicion, not conduct a trial-like evaluation of evidence. On the material alleging false entries, manipulation of donation accounts, and circumstances facilitating tax evasion, the discharge orders were unsustainable under Section 276C(2) of the Income-tax Act and were set aside. The matter was remanded for further proceedings before the competent criminal court.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=184119" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (2) TMI 216 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210686</link>
      <description>Section 482 CrPC remains available in exceptional cases despite the bar on a second revision under Section 397(3), where intervention is needed to prevent abuse of process or miscarriage of justice; the petition was therefore maintainable in principle. At the charge-framing stage, the court need only assess whether the material gives rise to strong suspicion, not conduct a trial-like evaluation of evidence. On the material alleging false entries, manipulation of donation accounts, and circumstances facilitating tax evasion, the discharge orders were unsustainable under Section 276C(2) of the Income-tax Act and were set aside. The matter was remanded for further proceedings before the competent criminal court.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210686</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>