<?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>2004 (11) TMI 606 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280981</link>
    <description>Exchanged correspondence, the sanction letter, margin-money arrangements and subsequent performance can evidence a concluded commercial contract, even where the arrangement concerns bank guarantees issued without commission. Where the bank had agreed to issue guarantees free of commission, it could not unilaterally levy commission or withhold matured fixed deposit receipts by invoking general lien or set-off; any alleged breach had to be pursued through a claim for compensation, not self-help appropriation. Interest on wrongfully withheld deposits was payable, but the trial court&#039;s rate was reduced to the prevailing fixed-deposit rate on maturity without quarterly rests.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 May 2019 17:37:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=573138" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (11) TMI 606 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280981</link>
      <description>Exchanged correspondence, the sanction letter, margin-money arrangements and subsequent performance can evidence a concluded commercial contract, even where the arrangement concerns bank guarantees issued without commission. Where the bank had agreed to issue guarantees free of commission, it could not unilaterally levy commission or withhold matured fixed deposit receipts by invoking general lien or set-off; any alleged breach had to be pursued through a claim for compensation, not self-help appropriation. Interest on wrongfully withheld deposits was payable, but the trial court&#039;s rate was reduced to the prevailing fixed-deposit rate on maturity without quarterly rests.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>