<?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>2020 (6) TMI 116 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395741</link>
    <description>The Court granted exemption from filing the notarized affidavit but required the petitioner to file the necessary Court fee within 72 hours. Three writ petitions were consolidated for hearing, with the respondent directed to file a counter affidavit addressing the applications. Compliance with an earlier order on employee salaries was noted, and funds were restricted from withdrawal. The case was scheduled for further proceedings on a specified date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2020 09:01:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=614434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 116 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395741</link>
      <description>The Court granted exemption from filing the notarized affidavit but required the petitioner to file the necessary Court fee within 72 hours. Three writ petitions were consolidated for hearing, with the respondent directed to file a counter affidavit addressing the applications. Compliance with an earlier order on employee salaries was noted, and funds were restricted from withdrawal. The case was scheduled for further proceedings on a specified date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395741</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>