<?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 (12) TMI 1825 - Bombay High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299287</link>
    <description>A dispute arising from a shareholding agreement and related transactions remained predominantly civil because the material showed non-performance of contractual obligations and recovery of money, not fraudulent or dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction. Mere later breach, over-invoicing allegations, or mismanagement did not by itself establish cheating or allied criminal offences prima facie. As the complainant had already pursued civil and company-law remedies and the criminal process appeared to be used as pressure for alleged dues, continuation of the FIR and investigation was an abuse of process. The FIR and investigation were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Dec 2021 19:50:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=663340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 1825 - Bombay High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299287</link>
      <description>A dispute arising from a shareholding agreement and related transactions remained predominantly civil because the material showed non-performance of contractual obligations and recovery of money, not fraudulent or dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction. Mere later breach, over-invoicing allegations, or mismanagement did not by itself establish cheating or allied criminal offences prima facie. As the complainant had already pursued civil and company-law remedies and the criminal process appeared to be used as pressure for alleged dues, continuation of the FIR and investigation was an abuse of process. The FIR and investigation were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299287</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>