<?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 1037 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303675</link>
    <description>Look-out circulars restricting overseas travel may be issued where departure is considered detrimental to India&#039;s economic interests or contrary to larger public interest. The right to travel abroad is not absolute, and reasonable restrictions may be imposed if the procedure complies with Article 21 and natural justice. Prior notice is not essential in the stated circumstances where the affected person has a post-decisional opportunity to seek revocation from the issuing authority. Substantial debt exposure, a guarantor&#039;s role, alleged financial irregularities, and risks to recovery and public funds supported treating the travel restriction as justified by economic and public-interest concerns.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2022 10:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=687133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 1037 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303675</link>
      <description>Look-out circulars restricting overseas travel may be issued where departure is considered detrimental to India&#039;s economic interests or contrary to larger public interest. The right to travel abroad is not absolute, and reasonable restrictions may be imposed if the procedure complies with Article 21 and natural justice. Prior notice is not essential in the stated circumstances where the affected person has a post-decisional opportunity to seek revocation from the issuing authority. Substantial debt exposure, a guarantor&#039;s role, alleged financial irregularities, and risks to recovery and public funds supported treating the travel restriction as justified by economic and public-interest concerns.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 May 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>