https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347362 Repeated, unqualified allegations against counsel assisting the Court, coupled with refusal to withdraw them unconditionally and continued disruptive communications, were treated as criminal contempt because the conduct was found to deliberately interfere with judicial proceedings and undermine advocates performing their professional duties. The Court found no bona fide truth-based justification for the accusations, noted that repeated opportunities to apologise or retract were not effectively used, and held the respondent guilty of criminal contempt. The respondent was sentenced to simple imprisonment for one week and a fine. en-us Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Sep 2017 14:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347362 Repeated, unqualified allegations against counsel assisting the Court, coupled with refusal to withdraw them unconditionally and continued disruptive communications, were treated as criminal contempt because the conduct was found to deliberately interfere with judicial proceedings and undermine advocates performing their professional duties. The Court found no bona fide truth-based justification for the accusations, noted that repeated opportunities to apologise or retract were not effectively used, and held the respondent guilty of criminal contempt. The respondent was sentenced to simple imprisonment for one week and a fine. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 31 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347362