<?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>2004 (8) TMI 412 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110577</link>
    <description>The Court acknowledged the petitioner&#039;s violation of orders but considered mitigating factors. The petitioner was directed to deposit the sale proceeds, and further orders would be issued upon resolving settlement allegations. The applications were disposed of with these observations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:56:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=147593" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 412 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110577</link>
      <description>The Court acknowledged the petitioner&#039;s violation of orders but considered mitigating factors. The petitioner was directed to deposit the sale proceeds, and further orders would be issued upon resolving settlement allegations. The applications were disposed of with these observations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>