<?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>2018 (2) TMI 1682 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356261</link>
    <description>The court remanded one writ petition challenging a seizure order under FEMA for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need for active participation and effective representation in statutory proceedings. The other petition was disposed of, allowing the continuation of the seizure order as no funds were withdrawn. The judgment underscored the importance of fair adjudication and opportunities for presenting evidence in cases involving legal complexities under FEMA.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=510792" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1682 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356261</link>
      <description>The court remanded one writ petition challenging a seizure order under FEMA for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need for active participation and effective representation in statutory proceedings. The other petition was disposed of, allowing the continuation of the seizure order as no funds were withdrawn. The judgment underscored the importance of fair adjudication and opportunities for presenting evidence in cases involving legal complexities under FEMA.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>FEMA</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356261</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>