<?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>2017 (6) TMI 1384 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307420</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the appellate Sessions Court&#039;s judgments acquitting the accused. It concluded that the prosecution was not maintainable due to the failure to serve the statutory demand notice to the company and the improper framing of the complaints. The Court dismissed the criminal appeals filed by the complainant, affirming the acquittal of the accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Apr 2023 21:20:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (6) TMI 1384 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307420</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the appellate Sessions Court&#039;s judgments acquitting the accused. It concluded that the prosecution was not maintainable due to the failure to serve the statutory demand notice to the company and the improper framing of the complaints. The Court dismissed the criminal appeals filed by the complainant, affirming the acquittal of the accused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307420</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>