<?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 (10) TMI 312 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444089</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner was aware of and did not dispute ownership of the web portals inspected. Since the material used was publicly available and the petitioner was effectively confronted with it, there was no violation of natural justice. The court also noted the availability of alternative remedies and found no grounds for maintainability of the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2025 14:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=728526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 312 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444089</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner was aware of and did not dispute ownership of the web portals inspected. Since the material used was publicly available and the petitioner was effectively confronted with it, there was no violation of natural justice. The court also noted the availability of alternative remedies and found no grounds for maintainability of the petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444089</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>