<?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>2023 (4) TMI 1186 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437160</link>
    <description>The court found no willful contempt by the respondent and criticized the petitioner&#039;s actions. A cost of Rs.25,000 was imposed on the petitioner for wrongly troubling the Managing Director. As subsequent applications were considered and rejected, the court concluded that no contempt was committed by the respondent. The contempt petition was closed with the cost payable to the respondent within a month.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Apr 2023 09:06:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=712157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 1186 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437160</link>
      <description>The court found no willful contempt by the respondent and criticized the petitioner&#039;s actions. A cost of Rs.25,000 was imposed on the petitioner for wrongly troubling the Managing Director. As subsequent applications were considered and rejected, the court concluded that no contempt was committed by the respondent. The contempt petition was closed with the cost payable to the respondent within a month.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437160</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>