<?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>1997 (2) TMI 601 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458525</link>
    <description>A document acted upon by both sides cannot be treated as a sham inter se where business records, invoices, vouchers and statutory returns were maintained under its terms, although surrounding clauses may still be examined to determine the true legal relationship. On construction, express language showing exclusive possession and control with the other party not deemed in possession pointed to agency, not tenancy, and the document&#039;s substance prevailed over its label. Relief directing removal of goods and related articles could also be granted in the same proceedings where it was incidental to the plaintiff&#039;s claim and arose from the same transaction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 10:47:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776500" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (2) TMI 601 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458525</link>
      <description>A document acted upon by both sides cannot be treated as a sham inter se where business records, invoices, vouchers and statutory returns were maintained under its terms, although surrounding clauses may still be examined to determine the true legal relationship. On construction, express language showing exclusive possession and control with the other party not deemed in possession pointed to agency, not tenancy, and the document&#039;s substance prevailed over its label. Relief directing removal of goods and related articles could also be granted in the same proceedings where it was incidental to the plaintiff&#039;s claim and arose from the same transaction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>