Mandatory textile export qualifiers distinguish flame-retardant fabrics from other listed fabrics for automated identification under the textiles ince...
Personal liberty safeguards restrict arrest after court-directed GST appearance, requiring interim release where authorities overreach pending proceed...
Alternative statutory remedy and delay bar GST writ challenges despite pending rectification, while distinct subject matter permits parallel proceedin...
Page of 4884
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 97661 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
IBBI suspended the registration of the Petitioner for two years due to various allegations. The High Court found that the Petitioner did not violate any regulations by imposing a non-refundable participation fee on bidders before a specific regulation was in force. Regarding the appointment of unregistered valuers, the Court noted that the valuers involved were registered individually, and their work was accepted without issue. However, the Court upheld the charge of appointing a support service, BRAL, in which the Petitioner was a partner, to increase fees, which contravened Liquidation Regulations. The Court modified the suspension to the period already served, acknowledging 20 months of suspension already undergone. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
IBBI suspended the registration of the Petitioner for two years due to various allegations. The High Court found that the Petitioner did not violate any regulations by imposing a non-refundable participation fee on bidders before a specific regulation was in force. Regarding the appointment of unregistered valuers, the Court noted that the valuers involved were registered individually, and their work was accepted without issue. However, the Court upheld the charge of appointing a support service, BRAL, in which the Petitioner was a partner, to increase fees, which contravened Liquidation Regulations. The Court modified the suspension to the period already served, acknowledging 20 months of suspension already undergone. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.