Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
Court dismisses writ petition challenging Companies Act order, petitioner can appeal, no costs awarded The Court dismissed the writ petition as the respondents had already issued an order under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court stated that ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Court dismisses writ petition challenging Companies Act order, petitioner can appeal, no costs awarded
The Court dismissed the writ petition as the respondents had already issued an order under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court stated that the petitioner could challenge this order through appropriate legal channels if aggrieved. No costs were awarded, and pending miscellaneous petitions were directed to be closed.
Issues: - Relief sought in the writ petition under Sections 206 to 208 of the Companies Act, 2013 - Passing of order by respondents under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013 - Dispute regarding the survival of cause in the writ petition
Analysis: The writ petition was filed seeking relief in the form of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction restraining the Respondents from taking coercive steps, including investigation under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013, without following the procedures under Sections 206 to 208 of the Act. The petitioner's counsel argued for this relief before the Court.
During the hearing, the Assistant Solicitor General of India representing the respondents informed the Court that the respondents had already passed an order on 27.02.2020 under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013. It was mentioned that if the petitioner was aggrieved by this order, they could challenge it through appropriate legal channels. The petitioner's senior counsel did not contest this submission made by the respondents.
After considering the submissions from both parties, the Court concluded that the cause in the writ petition was no longer valid as the respondents had already issued an order on 27.02.2020 under Section 212 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court clarified that if the petitioner remained aggrieved by this order, they were free to challenge it in accordance with the law. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the observation that no costs were to be awarded. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were also directed to be closed as a result of this judgment.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
