https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354014 Extraordinary writ relief under Article 226 was refused because the petitioner lacked clean hands, having misrepresented that oral directions permitted withdrawal of funds and having acted on that misrepresentation to withdraw amounts from attached accounts. The Court held that alleged oral instructions could not vary the written order and that such conduct showed an attempt to overreach the Court. On the same facts, the Court found a prima facie case of wilful disobedience and interference with the administration of justice, and directed suo motu civil and criminal contempt notice against the concerned persons. en-us Fri, 05 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jan 2018 09:26:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354014 Extraordinary writ relief under Article 226 was refused because the petitioner lacked clean hands, having misrepresented that oral directions permitted withdrawal of funds and having acted on that misrepresentation to withdraw amounts from attached accounts. The Court held that alleged oral instructions could not vary the written order and that such conduct showed an attempt to overreach the Court. On the same facts, the Court found a prima facie case of wilful disobedience and interference with the administration of justice, and directed suo motu civil and criminal contempt notice against the concerned persons. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 05 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354014