<?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>2014 (6) TMI 1075 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309516</link>
    <description>The appeal against the Common Order seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioners was dismissed due to the Respondent&#039;s refusal to pay admitted liability. The Court directed transfer of custody of machineries in certain cases but scheduled a separate hearing for a specific machinery due to the Respondent&#039;s refusal to part with it for business reasons.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2023 13:08:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725346" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 1075 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309516</link>
      <description>The appeal against the Common Order seeking appointment of Advocate Commissioners was dismissed due to the Respondent&#039;s refusal to pay admitted liability. The Court directed transfer of custody of machineries in certain cases but scheduled a separate hearing for a specific machinery due to the Respondent&#039;s refusal to part with it for business reasons.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 12 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309516</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>