<?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>2018 (8) TMI 2162 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458272</link>
    <description>A writ of mandamus was refused where the competent authorities had already examined the complaint under the foreign contribution regime and found no apparent violation or corroborated illegality, and the matter was not within CBI jurisdiction. The later renewal of the society&#039;s registration after scrutiny further supported the absence of adverse material. On that basis, the petition effectively sought a continuing mandamus for perpetual investigation, which was not warranted. The Court also noticed objections to standing, but the decisive reason was that no surviving legal basis remained for further judicial intervention. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable for the relief sought.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:52:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=774429" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 2162 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458272</link>
      <description>A writ of mandamus was refused where the competent authorities had already examined the complaint under the foreign contribution regime and found no apparent violation or corroborated illegality, and the matter was not within CBI jurisdiction. The later renewal of the society&#039;s registration after scrutiny further supported the absence of adverse material. On that basis, the petition effectively sought a continuing mandamus for perpetual investigation, which was not warranted. The Court also noticed objections to standing, but the decisive reason was that no surviving legal basis remained for further judicial intervention. The writ petition was therefore not maintainable for the relief sought.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458272</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>