<?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>2020 (2) TMI 804 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392360</link>
    <description>Preliminary verification is ordinarily advisable before registering a corruption FIR against a public servant, particularly to test disclosed income, returns, declarations and asset records and avoid unsupported criminal action. An FIR alleging disproportionate assets may be vulnerable where its foundational computations contain material arithmetic or valuation errors, including overstated assets, understated income, inclusion of disposed property, or double counting of construction components. Where no reliable prima facie material remains after such defects, continuation of investigation may constitute abuse of process and justify quashing under extraordinary writ or inherent jurisdiction, with consequential relief concerning seized assets and frozen accounts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2020 10:01:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=604413" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 804 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392360</link>
      <description>Preliminary verification is ordinarily advisable before registering a corruption FIR against a public servant, particularly to test disclosed income, returns, declarations and asset records and avoid unsupported criminal action. An FIR alleging disproportionate assets may be vulnerable where its foundational computations contain material arithmetic or valuation errors, including overstated assets, understated income, inclusion of disposed property, or double counting of construction components. Where no reliable prima facie material remains after such defects, continuation of investigation may constitute abuse of process and justify quashing under extraordinary writ or inherent jurisdiction, with consequential relief concerning seized assets and frozen accounts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392360</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>