<?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>1992 (9) TMI 376 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293796</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in a Contempt of Court case, setting aside the fines imposed on the appellants for delays and lack of faithful compliance with tribunal orders regarding promotions. The Court emphasized the requirement of wilful conduct as a crucial element in contempt cases and stated that non-compliance should be examined closely. In this instance, the Court found the sentence unjustified, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny in such matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2021 11:53:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (9) TMI 376 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293796</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in a Contempt of Court case, setting aside the fines imposed on the appellants for delays and lack of faithful compliance with tribunal orders regarding promotions. The Court emphasized the requirement of wilful conduct as a crucial element in contempt cases and stated that non-compliance should be examined closely. In this instance, the Court found the sentence unjustified, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny in such matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>