<?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 (11) TMI 1502 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456631</link>
    <description>An approved resolution plan that omits statutory electricity dues owed to a State distribution licensee does not bind that authority in the manner suggested by the petitioner, although the demand itself was not quashed because the approval order was not challenged. Reading the Electricity Act, 2003 with the supply code, the Court held that a licensee may refuse fresh connection or restoration of supply for premises until dues attributable to those premises are cleared, and this does not amount to barred monetary enforcement under insolvency law. The writ petition therefore failed and the impugned communications remained undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2024 20:13:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763085" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 1502 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456631</link>
      <description>An approved resolution plan that omits statutory electricity dues owed to a State distribution licensee does not bind that authority in the manner suggested by the petitioner, although the demand itself was not quashed because the approval order was not challenged. Reading the Electricity Act, 2003 with the supply code, the Court held that a licensee may refuse fresh connection or restoration of supply for premises until dues attributable to those premises are cleared, and this does not amount to barred monetary enforcement under insolvency law. The writ petition therefore failed and the impugned communications remained undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456631</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>