<?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>1972 (2) TMI 92 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169954</link>
    <description>False entries in official records showing completion of rectification work and payment of entrusted funds constituted fabrication of documents, criminal breach of trust and criminal misconduct, because the offence was complete when the records were prepared and the amount was shown as disbursed without authority. An alleged irregularity in investigation for want of prior permission did not invalidate the conviction, as no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was shown. The statutory limitation bar also did not apply, because dishonest misappropriation and fabrication were not acts done in good faith or under the relevant Act. The convictions and sentences were therefore sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2015 17:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=384738" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (2) TMI 92 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169954</link>
      <description>False entries in official records showing completion of rectification work and payment of entrusted funds constituted fabrication of documents, criminal breach of trust and criminal misconduct, because the offence was complete when the records were prepared and the amount was shown as disbursed without authority. An alleged irregularity in investigation for want of prior permission did not invalidate the conviction, as no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was shown. The statutory limitation bar also did not apply, because dishonest misappropriation and fabrication were not acts done in good faith or under the relevant Act. The convictions and sentences were therefore sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 15 Feb 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169954</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>