<?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>2016 (4) TMI 1253 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194919</link>
    <description>The court directed the 3rd respondent to dispose of the appeal within three months and instructed the 2nd respondent to consider releasing the seized gold and jewellery within four weeks, following legal precedent. The judgment emphasized adherence to legal principles and timely resolution of the case without imposing costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2017 06:46:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=491548" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1253 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194919</link>
      <description>The court directed the 3rd respondent to dispose of the appeal within three months and instructed the 2nd respondent to consider releasing the seized gold and jewellery within four weeks, following legal precedent. The judgment emphasized adherence to legal principles and timely resolution of the case without imposing costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>