<?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>2017 (10) TMI 909 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349754</link>
    <description>The court held that the rejection of the petitioner&#039;s registration under Section 12 of the FCRA was unsustainable due to lack of material evidence. The court directed the respondents to reprocess the application as the denial was unsupported, with each party bearing its own costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2018 14:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=493337" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 909 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349754</link>
      <description>The court held that the rejection of the petitioner&#039;s registration under Section 12 of the FCRA was unsustainable due to lack of material evidence. The court directed the respondents to reprocess the application as the denial was unsupported, with each party bearing its own costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349754</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>