Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
HC held that the impugned notice and order were quashed due to lack of jurisdictional propriety. The respondent-Authority failed to provide adequate intimation regarding ITC reversal, and the petitioner demonstrated genuine unawareness of procedural requirements. The Court remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to conduct a de novo examination of ITC reversal for 2017-18, directing a fresh order within twelve weeks. While the Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal on delay grounds, the HC recognized procedural constraints and procedural fairness, effectively setting aside the original order and providing an opportunity for proper administrative review.
HC held that the impugned notice and order were quashed due to lack of jurisdictional propriety. The respondent-Authority failed to provide adequate intimation regarding ITC reversal, and the petitioner demonstrated genuine unawareness of procedural requirements. The Court remanded the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority to conduct a de novo examination of ITC reversal for 2017-18, directing a fresh order within twelve weeks. While the Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal on delay grounds, the HC recognized procedural constraints and procedural fairness, effectively setting aside the original order and providing an opportunity for proper administrative review.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.