<?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>2019 (11) TMI 1371 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285752</link>
    <description>The Delhi High Court condoned a 21-day delay in re-filing the appeal after accepting the explanation offered, allowing the matter to proceed. It then remanded the appeal to the Appellate Tribunal for PMLA, directed restoration of the appeal, and required the tribunal to hear both parties and decide the case within six weeks in line with a coordinate-bench precedent. The appeal was disposed of on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2020 08:35:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601300" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 1371 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285752</link>
      <description>The Delhi High Court condoned a 21-day delay in re-filing the appeal after accepting the explanation offered, allowing the matter to proceed. It then remanded the appeal to the Appellate Tribunal for PMLA, directed restoration of the appeal, and required the tribunal to hear both parties and decide the case within six weeks in line with a coordinate-bench precedent. The appeal was disposed of on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>