Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Termination of a share purchase agreement required prominent disclosure under the LODR Regulations where the listed entity had conspicuously announced approval of the acquisition. Mentioning the termination only in small print within a note to unaudited financial results, rather than in the principal board-meeting communication, was treated as no disclosure because investors rely on information about financial position, proposed ventures and collaborations. The complaint-dismissal communication was set aside, and SEBI and the stock exchange were directed to re-examine the mandatory-disclosure issue and issue appropriate orders within four weeks.
Termination of a share purchase agreement required prominent disclosure under the LODR Regulations where the listed entity had conspicuously announced approval of the acquisition. Mentioning the termination only in small print within a note to unaudited financial results, rather than in the principal board-meeting communication, was treated as no disclosure because investors rely on information about financial position, proposed ventures and collaborations. The complaint-dismissal communication was set aside, and SEBI and the stock exchange were directed to re-examine the mandatory-disclosure issue and issue appropriate orders within four weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.