<?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>2025 (11) TMI 297 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780829</link>
    <description>Breach of a court-recorded settlement or affidavit of undertaking attracts contempt only where non-compliance is proved to be wilful, deliberate and contumacious. On the facts, the court found substantial compliance, with only a limited balance outstanding and the delay attributed to financial constraints, so contempt was not made out; time was granted to clear the balance, and execution remained available if payment was not made within the period allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Nov 2025 08:37:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=862894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 297 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780829</link>
      <description>Breach of a court-recorded settlement or affidavit of undertaking attracts contempt only where non-compliance is proved to be wilful, deliberate and contumacious. On the facts, the court found substantial compliance, with only a limited balance outstanding and the delay attributed to financial constraints, so contempt was not made out; time was granted to clear the balance, and execution remained available if payment was not made within the period allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780829</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>