<?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>1996 (11) TMI 470 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199994</link>
    <description>The Court determined that the complaint filed by M/s. Satish and Company was not validly instituted due to lack of authorization from the Manager at the time of filing. The subsequent authorization letter filed one year later did not retroactively validate the complaint. As a result, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the lower court&#039;s decision to acquit the accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:21:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=513037" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (11) TMI 470 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199994</link>
      <description>The Court determined that the complaint filed by M/s. Satish and Company was not validly instituted due to lack of authorization from the Manager at the time of filing. The subsequent authorization letter filed one year later did not retroactively validate the complaint. As a result, the Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the lower court&#039;s decision to acquit the accused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=199994</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>