<?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>2022 (3) TMI 1640 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462060</link>
    <description>The SC held that criminal proceedings against a company officer cannot be sustained on designation alone; prima facie material must show the accused&#039;s personal role or participation in the alleged offence. On the complaint and charge-sheet, only general allegations were made about import, registration, and short payment of road tax, with no specific material of conspiracy, forgery, fabrication, or other individual criminal conduct by the Chairman and Managing Director. The dispute was essentially a tax assessment and recovery issue, and the differential tax had already been paid by the vehicle owner. Continuation of the prosecution was therefore an abuse of process and the proceedings were quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 May 2025 19:00:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=822810" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 1640 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462060</link>
      <description>The SC held that criminal proceedings against a company officer cannot be sustained on designation alone; prima facie material must show the accused&#039;s personal role or participation in the alleged offence. On the complaint and charge-sheet, only general allegations were made about import, registration, and short payment of road tax, with no specific material of conspiracy, forgery, fabrication, or other individual criminal conduct by the Chairman and Managing Director. The dispute was essentially a tax assessment and recovery issue, and the differential tax had already been paid by the vehicle owner. Continuation of the prosecution was therefore an abuse of process and the proceedings were quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=462060</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>