<?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>1968 (9) TMI 118 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182162</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the High Court&#039;s decision to set aside an election due to corrupt practices under the Representation of People Act. The appellant&#039;s election to the Santokhgarh Assembly Constituency was annulled for filing a false return of election expenses exceeding the prescribed limit. The primary issue was the classification of a payment made before critical dates as election expenses, with the Court emphasizing expenses promoting the candidate&#039;s interests qualify as election expenses. The Court upheld the decision, emphasizing adherence to expenditure limits and expenses directly related to the election campaign.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 11:26:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=426631" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1968 (9) TMI 118 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182162</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the High Court&#039;s decision to set aside an election due to corrupt practices under the Representation of People Act. The appellant&#039;s election to the Santokhgarh Assembly Constituency was annulled for filing a false return of election expenses exceeding the prescribed limit. The primary issue was the classification of a payment made before critical dates as election expenses, with the Court emphasizing expenses promoting the candidate&#039;s interests qualify as election expenses. The Court upheld the decision, emphasizing adherence to expenditure limits and expenses directly related to the election campaign.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Sep 1968 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=182162</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>