<?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 680 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194476</link>
    <description>The Court allowed the applications, quashing the complaints and the process issued by the Magistrate. The Court held that the financial company was entitled to act as per the terms of the hire purchase agreement and that the transaction did not constitute a &quot;loan&quot; under the Bombay Money Lenders Act. The complaints registered as Criminal Case Nos. 1381/2000, 1382/2000, and 1383/2000 were quashed and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Sep 2017 13:32:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488761" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 680 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194476</link>
      <description>The Court allowed the applications, quashing the complaints and the process issued by the Magistrate. The Court held that the financial company was entitled to act as per the terms of the hire purchase agreement and that the transaction did not constitute a &quot;loan&quot; under the Bombay Money Lenders Act. The complaints registered as Criminal Case Nos. 1381/2000, 1382/2000, and 1383/2000 were quashed and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194476</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>