<?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>1998 (4) TMI 145 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45013</link>
    <description>The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the orders of the respondents and directing them to grant cash compensatory support to the petitioner. The court emphasized that procedural technicalities should not deprive the petitioner of its rightful claim and that the Department&#039;s actions must be reasonable and in the public interest. The Rule Nisi was made absolute, with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 17:07:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83542" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 145 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45013</link>
      <description>The court allowed the writ petition, quashing the orders of the respondents and directing them to grant cash compensatory support to the petitioner. The court emphasized that procedural technicalities should not deprive the petitioner of its rightful claim and that the Department&#039;s actions must be reasonable and in the public interest. The Rule Nisi was made absolute, with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45013</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>