<?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>1990 (6) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42958</link>
    <description>Long and unexplained delay in passing a preventive detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act can vitiate subjective satisfaction where the live link between the prejudicial act and detention is broken. Here, the seizure and investigation were completed months before the detention order, and the detenu had been released on bail, yet the order was issued only much later. The explanation that further documents were awaited was found unsatisfactory. The delay was held to have destroyed the necessary proximity between the incident and the need for detention, rendering the detention order illegal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:43:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81487" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (6) TMI 80 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42958</link>
      <description>Long and unexplained delay in passing a preventive detention order under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act can vitiate subjective satisfaction where the live link between the prejudicial act and detention is broken. Here, the seizure and investigation were completed months before the detention order, and the detenu had been released on bail, yet the order was issued only much later. The explanation that further documents were awaited was found unsatisfactory. The delay was held to have destroyed the necessary proximity between the incident and the need for detention, rendering the detention order illegal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42958</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>