<?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>2016 (3) TMI 32 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272220</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against the appellants under Sections 419 and 420 IPC, emphasizing that quashing should be rare and based on case specifics. The court found no dishonest intention in the Technology Transfer Agreement, deeming the dispute civil, not criminal. As the appellants acted officially, requiring prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C., the court set aside the High Court&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2016 16:21:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=418513" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 32 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272220</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against the appellants under Sections 419 and 420 IPC, emphasizing that quashing should be rare and based on case specifics. The court found no dishonest intention in the Technology Transfer Agreement, deeming the dispute civil, not criminal. As the appellants acted officially, requiring prior sanction under Section 197 Cr.P.C., the court set aside the High Court&#039;s decision, ruling in favor of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>