https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13982 Speedy-trial protection under Article 21 does not justify quashing Income-tax Act prosecutions where delay is substantially attributable to the accused. Repeated absence, resistance to trial progress, and other dilatory conduct defeat a claim that the prosecution caused inordinate delay. Tax-offence prosecutions also fall outside the protective time-limit directions developed in the Common Cause line of criminal-delay decisions, particularly where the accused wholly or partly caused the delay. Criminal proceedings may therefore continue despite prolonged trial duration when the accused's conduct materially contributed to it. en-us Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:18:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13982 Speedy-trial protection under Article 21 does not justify quashing Income-tax Act prosecutions where delay is substantially attributable to the accused. Repeated absence, resistance to trial progress, and other dilatory conduct defeat a claim that the prosecution caused inordinate delay. Tax-offence prosecutions also fall outside the protective time-limit directions developed in the Common Cause line of criminal-delay decisions, particularly where the accused wholly or partly caused the delay. Criminal proceedings may therefore continue despite prolonged trial duration when the accused's conduct materially contributed to it. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13982