<?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>2022 (8) TMI 1318 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305475</link>
    <description>Cancellation of the petitioner&#039;s certificate of registration and the appellate rejection were challenged on the basis of the Net Owned Fund requirement. The Delhi HC noted the Reserve Bank of India&#039;s stand that it would re-examine the matter on remand and the petitioner&#039;s agreement to such reconsideration. In view of the current legal position and the Court&#039;s earlier judgments, the impugned orders were not treated as final for sustaining the dispute at that stage, and fresh decision-making by the Reserve Bank of India was directed. The merits were left open, and the petitioner was permitted to file additional representations and documents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2022 14:39:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=697835" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 1318 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305475</link>
      <description>Cancellation of the petitioner&#039;s certificate of registration and the appellate rejection were challenged on the basis of the Net Owned Fund requirement. The Delhi HC noted the Reserve Bank of India&#039;s stand that it would re-examine the matter on remand and the petitioner&#039;s agreement to such reconsideration. In view of the current legal position and the Court&#039;s earlier judgments, the impugned orders were not treated as final for sustaining the dispute at that stage, and fresh decision-making by the Reserve Bank of India was directed. The merits were left open, and the petitioner was permitted to file additional representations and documents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305475</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>