Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court Invalidates Company Rules; New Procedure for Auditing Liquidator's Accounts Ordered</h1> <h3>Fire & General Insurance Co. of India Ltd., In re.</h3> Fire & General Insurance Co. of India Ltd., In re. - [1962] 32 COMP. CAS. 957 (CAL.) Issues Involved:1. Validity of Rules 301 to 304 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959.2. Calculation of audit fees under Rule 304.3. Authority of the Supreme Court under Section 643 of the Companies Act, 1956, to make rules regarding the audit of liquidator's accounts.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of Rules 301 to 304 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959:The judgment scrutinizes the validity of Rules 301 to 304 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, in light of Section 643 of the Companies Act, 1956. It was contended that these rules are ultra vires the Companies Act, 1956. The court noted that Section 462 of the Companies Act mandates that the court having jurisdiction should cause the liquidator's accounts to be audited 'in such manner as it thinks fit.' However, Rules 301 to 304 prescribe a detailed procedure for the audit, which includes the Registrar forwarding the accounts to the auditor and the auditor providing a certificate of audit. The court concluded that these rules interfere with the court's discretion as provided under Section 462 and are, therefore, beyond the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by Section 643. The court held that the rules are of no effect as they contradict express provisions in the Companies Act, 1956.2. Calculation of Audit Fees under Rule 304:The official liquidator suggested remuneration for the auditor not in accordance with Rule 304, which led to a dispute. Rule 304 states that audit fees should be calculated on the gross amount brought to credit, deducting amounts spent on carrying on the business and amounts paid to secured creditors. The official liquidator argued that the rule should not apply until secured creditors are paid off. However, the court clarified that the fees should be calculated based on actual payments made to secured creditors, not amounts payable. The court also noted that the audit fees calculated as per Rule 304 were significantly higher than previous practices, leading to a substantial portion of the assets being consumed by audit fees. Despite these concerns, the court did not delve deeply into this issue, as it found the rules themselves to be ultra vires.3. Authority of the Supreme Court under Section 643 of the Companies Act, 1956:The court examined whether the Supreme Court had the authority under Section 643 to frame Rules 301 to 304. Section 643 mandates the Supreme Court to make rules for matters related to the winding up of companies, but the manner of auditing liquidator's accounts is left to the court having jurisdiction. The court observed that Section 462(3) specifically grants the court the discretion to determine the manner of audit, which cannot be overridden by rules made by the Supreme Court. The judgment emphasized that while the Supreme Court can prescribe the form and frequency of accounts, it cannot dictate the manner of auditing, thus rendering Rules 301 to 304 invalid.Conclusion:The judgment concludes that Rules 301 to 304 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, are ultra vires the Companies Act, 1956, as they infringe upon the court's discretion provided under Section 462. Consequently, the court directed the Assistant Registrar (Company) to submit a report on the procedure to be adopted for auditing the liquidator's accounts, indicating that new administrative directions would be issued.Appeal:An appeal (No. 129 of 1961) against this judgment was dismissed on the ground of non-maintainability.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found