<?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>2008 (7) TMI 1099 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456764</link>
    <description>Wilful disobedience is the core element of civil contempt, and a mere mistaken interpretation or erroneous attempt at compliance does not by itself amount to contempt. The Court found that the respondents had produced the relevant records, explained the vacancy position year-wise, and taken steps in purported compliance with the earlier directions. As the materials did not show any deliberate attempt to circumvent or defy the orders, wilful contempt was not made out and the respondents were not liable to be punished.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2024 12:39:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763982" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 1099 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456764</link>
      <description>Wilful disobedience is the core element of civil contempt, and a mere mistaken interpretation or erroneous attempt at compliance does not by itself amount to contempt. The Court found that the respondents had produced the relevant records, explained the vacancy position year-wise, and taken steps in purported compliance with the earlier directions. As the materials did not show any deliberate attempt to circumvent or defy the orders, wilful contempt was not made out and the respondents were not liable to be punished.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456764</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>