<?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 (7) TMI 261 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396592</link>
    <description>The court allowed the revision petition, setting aside the order taking cognizance under Section 420 IPC due to lack of supporting material in the complaint. The complaint was found time-barred under Section 142 of the NI Act as it was filed after the prescribed period without seeking an extension. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to explain the delay, emphasizing compliance with statutory provisions and the need for valid reasons for any legal proceedings delay.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2020 10:56:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=617230" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (7) TMI 261 - TRIPURA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396592</link>
      <description>The court allowed the revision petition, setting aside the order taking cognizance under Section 420 IPC due to lack of supporting material in the complaint. The complaint was found time-barred under Section 142 of the NI Act as it was filed after the prescribed period without seeking an extension. The petitioner was granted an opportunity to explain the delay, emphasizing compliance with statutory provisions and the need for valid reasons for any legal proceedings delay.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396592</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>