<?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>1971 (5) TMI 76 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296335</link>
    <description>Section 9A disqualification applies only where the candidate himself has entered into a government contract in the course of his trade or business, and a company&#039;s contract cannot be treated as the personal contract of its Chairman merely because of office; the alleged company contract was therefore not attributable to the candidate. For corrupt practice under Section 123(4), a statement must be a false factual assertion about a candidate&#039;s personal character or conduct made knowingly false or without belief in its truth; the impugned speeches and publication had an objective basis and the charge failed. For Section 123(6), the alleged election expenditure had to be proved as election expense exceeding the statutory limit, but mixed use of the vehicles and purchases was not established as election expenditure; that charge also failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 May 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2021 11:45:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649757" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (5) TMI 76 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296335</link>
      <description>Section 9A disqualification applies only where the candidate himself has entered into a government contract in the course of his trade or business, and a company&#039;s contract cannot be treated as the personal contract of its Chairman merely because of office; the alleged company contract was therefore not attributable to the candidate. For corrupt practice under Section 123(4), a statement must be a false factual assertion about a candidate&#039;s personal character or conduct made knowingly false or without belief in its truth; the impugned speeches and publication had an objective basis and the charge failed. For Section 123(6), the alleged election expenditure had to be proved as election expense exceeding the statutory limit, but mixed use of the vehicles and purchases was not established as election expenditure; that charge also failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 May 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296335</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>