<?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>2006 (2) TMI 667 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187076</link>
    <description>The court set aside the portion of the impugned order related to BPSC charges and ruled that the petitioner was only liable to pay peak hour charges of Rs. 1,12,384. The court allowed payment in two equal instalments, with the first due by 01.03.2006 and the second by 01.04.2006. Failure to comply would result in immediate recovery by the respondents. The court disposed of the writ petition without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2018 12:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444185" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 667 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187076</link>
      <description>The court set aside the portion of the impugned order related to BPSC charges and ruled that the petitioner was only liable to pay peak hour charges of Rs. 1,12,384. The court allowed payment in two equal instalments, with the first due by 01.03.2006 and the second by 01.04.2006. Failure to comply would result in immediate recovery by the respondents. The court disposed of the writ petition without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187076</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>