<?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>2008 (9) TMI 1028 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305049</link>
    <description>The court allowed the original side appeal, setting aside the order revoking leave to sue. The appellant was granted the opportunity to prove sales within the court&#039;s jurisdiction during trial. Jurisdictional issues and cause of action were deemed trial matters, not for preliminary determination. The court emphasized the need for parties to present evidence during trial to substantiate their claims, directing the suit to proceed for a conclusive resolution of remedies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2022 12:49:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695729" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 1028 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305049</link>
      <description>The court allowed the original side appeal, setting aside the order revoking leave to sue. The appellant was granted the opportunity to prove sales within the court&#039;s jurisdiction during trial. Jurisdictional issues and cause of action were deemed trial matters, not for preliminary determination. The court emphasized the need for parties to present evidence during trial to substantiate their claims, directing the suit to proceed for a conclusive resolution of remedies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305049</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>