<?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>1982 (6) TMI 252 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174007</link>
    <description>A procedural requirement enacted to advance the object of a public welfare statute will be treated as directory where strict compliance would defeat that purpose. Rule 9(j) requiring supply of the Public Analyst&#039;s report within 10 days was held directory, not mandatory, because it was designed to secure prompt communication and enable timely challenge. Failure to comply did not vitiate the prosecution in the absence of prejudice to the accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2015 09:56:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=398985" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (6) TMI 252 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174007</link>
      <description>A procedural requirement enacted to advance the object of a public welfare statute will be treated as directory where strict compliance would defeat that purpose. Rule 9(j) requiring supply of the Public Analyst&#039;s report within 10 days was held directory, not mandatory, because it was designed to secure prompt communication and enable timely challenge. Failure to comply did not vitiate the prosecution in the absence of prejudice to the accused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jun 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174007</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>