<?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 1211 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781743</link>
    <description>HC dismissed the petition seeking permission to travel to UK for medical treatment. It held that petitioner&#039;s claim of being an uninformed non-executive director was contradicted by her own filings describing extensive business experience and by her role in signing the MRA allegedly used to evade creditors, attracting liability under Companies Act provisions. The Court noted a consistent pattern of non-cooperation, including failure to comply with conditions for suspension of LOC, and found no material change in circumstances. Medical procedure sought was available in India, and petitioner&#039;s foreign nationality, lack of roots in India, and co-accused son abroad created a real flight risk. Petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2025 08:42:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=865868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 1211 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781743</link>
      <description>HC dismissed the petition seeking permission to travel to UK for medical treatment. It held that petitioner&#039;s claim of being an uninformed non-executive director was contradicted by her own filings describing extensive business experience and by her role in signing the MRA allegedly used to evade creditors, attracting liability under Companies Act provisions. The Court noted a consistent pattern of non-cooperation, including failure to comply with conditions for suspension of LOC, and found no material change in circumstances. Medical procedure sought was available in India, and petitioner&#039;s foreign nationality, lack of roots in India, and co-accused son abroad created a real flight risk. Petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781743</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>