<?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>2003 (10) TMI 386 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108337</link>
    <description>The court held that the appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act was maintainable, rejecting the argument that Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure barred it. Emphasizing the substantive right of appeal provided by Section 483, the court admitted the appeal, finding merit in the arguments raised. The court expedited the hearing due to the significance of the legal issues at hand and scheduled the appeal for further directions to set a hearing date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2019 10:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145354" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 386 - HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108337</link>
      <description>The court held that the appeal under Section 483 of the Companies Act was maintainable, rejecting the argument that Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure barred it. Emphasizing the substantive right of appeal provided by Section 483, the court admitted the appeal, finding merit in the arguments raised. The court expedited the hearing due to the significance of the legal issues at hand and scheduled the appeal for further directions to set a hearing date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108337</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>