https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171854 A clear, specific and authoritative command is required before a court communication can be treated as a direction; a casual or incidental remark is only obiter dictum. The Special Judge's refusal to accept the closure report was the operative order, and the accompanying observation about seeking sanction and taking further action did not mandate prosecution or address any authority in binding terms. The High Court therefore erred in treating that observation as an impermissible direction to the sanctioning authority and in quashing the order on that basis. The Special Judge's order rejecting the closure report was restored. en-us Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jun 2025 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171854 A clear, specific and authoritative command is required before a court communication can be treated as a direction; a casual or incidental remark is only obiter dictum. The Special Judge's refusal to accept the closure report was the operative order, and the accompanying observation about seeking sanction and taking further action did not mandate prosecution or address any authority in binding terms. The High Court therefore erred in treating that observation as an impermissible direction to the sanctioning authority and in quashing the order on that basis. The Special Judge's order rejecting the closure report was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171854