Natural justice in insolvency-professional discipline requires disclosed material; notices based on extraneous material and ignored defences are vitia...
Development rights transfers treated as immovable property, while construction abatement applies and repeated non-payment permits extended service-tax...
The High Court reviewed a case involving proceedings under FERA against a juristic person. The petitioner contended that the complaint was invalid as it was not filed by the authorized personnel as required by Section 61 (2) (ii) of FERA, 1973. The court found that the complaint lacked proper authorization and relied on a statement that did not support the allegations. Referring to a legal precedent, the court determined that the petitioner should be exonerated from criminal prosecution due to the lack of merit in the case. Consequently, the court deemed the continuation of the complaint case as an abuse of the court process and quashed it.
The High Court reviewed a case involving proceedings under FERA against a juristic person. The petitioner contended that the complaint was invalid as it was not filed by the authorized personnel as required by Section 61 (2) (ii) of FERA, 1973. The court found that the complaint lacked proper authorization and relied on a statement that did not support the allegations. Referring to a legal precedent, the court determined that the petitioner should be exonerated from criminal prosecution due to the lack of merit in the case. Consequently, the court deemed the continuation of the complaint case as an abuse of the court process and quashed it.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
