<?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>2017 (8) TMI 1578 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283616</link>
    <description>Abuse of official position through repeated plot allotment changes, conversion of land use, and record manipulation was treated as criminal conspiracy and criminal misconduct because the allotment scheme did not permit such successive conversions and the appellants secured a valuable developed-sector plot and additional area without lawful justification or corresponding charges. The SC upheld the conviction, finding prior concert and pecuniary advantage established by the surrounding circumstances. It nevertheless reduced the sentence from three years to two years, taking into account the long lapse of time, the period already undergone in custody, and the hardship arising from the conviction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Oct 2019 13:00:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=589463" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1578 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283616</link>
      <description>Abuse of official position through repeated plot allotment changes, conversion of land use, and record manipulation was treated as criminal conspiracy and criminal misconduct because the allotment scheme did not permit such successive conversions and the appellants secured a valuable developed-sector plot and additional area without lawful justification or corresponding charges. The SC upheld the conviction, finding prior concert and pecuniary advantage established by the surrounding circumstances. It nevertheless reduced the sentence from three years to two years, taking into account the long lapse of time, the period already undergone in custody, and the hardship arising from the conviction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283616</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>