<?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>2015 (12) TMI 1527 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181828</link>
    <description>A detenu may be permitted to challenge a preventive detention order in later forfeiture proceedings where the detention operated under a special emergency regime and he had no real practical opportunity to contest it earlier. The Court distinguished cases involving a normal detention order, where failure to challenge an available order may preclude a later attack when the order is relied on for forfeiture. Because the emergency-linked declaration had been revoked and the appellant was released immediately, the earlier authority cited by the High Court did not govern the situation. The High Court&#039;s refusal to allow the challenge was set aside, and the matter was remitted for consideration of the detention challenge on merits before further forfeiture action.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Apr 2016 10:26:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425215" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1527 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181828</link>
      <description>A detenu may be permitted to challenge a preventive detention order in later forfeiture proceedings where the detention operated under a special emergency regime and he had no real practical opportunity to contest it earlier. The Court distinguished cases involving a normal detention order, where failure to challenge an available order may preclude a later attack when the order is relied on for forfeiture. Because the emergency-linked declaration had been revoked and the appellant was released immediately, the earlier authority cited by the High Court did not govern the situation. The High Court&#039;s refusal to allow the challenge was set aside, and the matter was remitted for consideration of the detention challenge on merits before further forfeiture action.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181828</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>