<?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 (8) TMI 1326 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197205</link>
    <description>An earlier direction granting opportunity for necessitating arrest was recalled because no notice had been served on the concerned respondents&#039; counsel before that part of the order was passed. Since the absence of notice was not disputed, the court treated the lack of prior hearing as sufficient cause to recall only the specific portion affected. The remaining part of the earlier order was left intact, and the recall application was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2017 08:41:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501701" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 1326 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197205</link>
      <description>An earlier direction granting opportunity for necessitating arrest was recalled because no notice had been served on the concerned respondents&#039; counsel before that part of the order was passed. Since the absence of notice was not disputed, the court treated the lack of prior hearing as sufficient cause to recall only the specific portion affected. The remaining part of the earlier order was left intact, and the recall application was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197205</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>