<?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>2013 (2) TMI 201 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220796</link>
    <description>Preventive detention under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act was held unsustainable where the detenue&#039;s passport had been retained and the material did not show a real likelihood of future smuggling activity. The Court reiterated that preventive detention is an exceptional measure that must remain within narrow limits because it affects personal liberty under Article 21, and that it cannot be invoked when ordinary criminal law is adequate to address the alleged conduct. On the facts, the possibility of foreign travel and prejudicial activity was remote, so the detention order was quashed and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Oct 2015 10:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (2) TMI 201 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220796</link>
      <description>Preventive detention under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act was held unsustainable where the detenue&#039;s passport had been retained and the material did not show a real likelihood of future smuggling activity. The Court reiterated that preventive detention is an exceptional measure that must remain within narrow limits because it affects personal liberty under Article 21, and that it cannot be invoked when ordinary criminal law is adequate to address the alleged conduct. On the facts, the possibility of foreign travel and prejudicial activity was remote, so the detention order was quashed and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>