https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410118 Criminal proceedings were not fit for quashing under the inherent jurisdiction because the allegations, taken at face value, disclosed possible offences linked to a claimed tax exemption based on an allegedly false certificate and an asserted unlawful tax advantage. The accused's challenges on genuineness of the certificate, absence of mens rea, and later withdrawal of the exemption claim raised disputed questions of fact that required trial. The governing principle is that quashing is justified only where the complaint does not disclose an offence or is plainly frivolous, vexatious, or oppressive; a defence assertion alone is insufficient to stop prosecution at the threshold. en-us Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Jul 2021 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410118 Criminal proceedings were not fit for quashing under the inherent jurisdiction because the allegations, taken at face value, disclosed possible offences linked to a claimed tax exemption based on an allegedly false certificate and an asserted unlawful tax advantage. The accused's challenges on genuineness of the certificate, absence of mens rea, and later withdrawal of the exemption claim raised disputed questions of fact that required trial. The governing principle is that quashing is justified only where the complaint does not disclose an offence or is plainly frivolous, vexatious, or oppressive; a defence assertion alone is insufficient to stop prosecution at the threshold. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410118