<?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 (8) TMI 1789 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279734</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed a professional lawyer to represent the petitioner in court proceedings, limiting oral arguments to one day. The Court emphasized the need for timely presentation of arguments without extending to subsequent dates. The judgment highlighted differences in views between Bombay High Court and Delhi and Punjab and Haryana. The Court, in the interest of justice, disposed of the special leave petition without expressing any opinion on the case&#039;s merits, along with all pending applications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Apr 2019 05:57:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=565295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 1789 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279734</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed a professional lawyer to represent the petitioner in court proceedings, limiting oral arguments to one day. The Court emphasized the need for timely presentation of arguments without extending to subsequent dates. The judgment highlighted differences in views between Bombay High Court and Delhi and Punjab and Haryana. The Court, in the interest of justice, disposed of the special leave petition without expressing any opinion on the case&#039;s merits, along with all pending applications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>