<?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 (12) TMI 1196 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241531</link>
    <description>The court concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to the unconditional de-freezing of the bank account. It directed that the amount deposited in the bank account after the date of freezing should be released, subject to the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee to the respondent for the amount credited after the account was frozen. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Sep 2014 15:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=340770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (12) TMI 1196 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241531</link>
      <description>The court concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to the unconditional de-freezing of the bank account. It directed that the amount deposited in the bank account after the date of freezing should be released, subject to the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee to the respondent for the amount credited after the account was frozen. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241531</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>