<?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>2021 (5) TMI 359 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407480</link>
    <description>The court upheld the validity of the Master Circular dated 01.07.2015 and dismissed the writ petition. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring financial stability and public interest in the banking sector, suggesting the RBI revisit the Circular concerning direct retail participation in high-risk instruments like AT 1 bonds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 08:29:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=644033" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 359 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407480</link>
      <description>The court upheld the validity of the Master Circular dated 01.07.2015 and dismissed the writ petition. The court emphasized the importance of ensuring financial stability and public interest in the banking sector, suggesting the RBI revisit the Circular concerning direct retail participation in high-risk instruments like AT 1 bonds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>