Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
The HC upheld the impugned judgment in full and dismissed the appeal. The court found the revocation of the IPLOI (as amended) and subsequent invocation of the unconditional bank guarantee valid under the contractual terms: the Appellants defaulted, Clause 11 and the Addendum authorized termination and invocation, and the IPLOI prevailed over any RFP discrepancy. The Section 7 application filed by Respondent No.1 was not admitted before revocation and was ultimately dismissed as infructuous, so no actionable fraud was attributable to Respondent No.1; allegations of fraud were unpleaded and unproved. The court declined to restrain invocation of the unconditional BG absent egregious fraud or irretrievable injustice.
The HC upheld the impugned judgment in full and dismissed the appeal. The court found the revocation of the IPLOI (as amended) and subsequent invocation of the unconditional bank guarantee valid under the contractual terms: the Appellants defaulted, Clause 11 and the Addendum authorized termination and invocation, and the IPLOI prevailed over any RFP discrepancy. The Section 7 application filed by Respondent No.1 was not admitted before revocation and was ultimately dismissed as infructuous, so no actionable fraud was attributable to Respondent No.1; allegations of fraud were unpleaded and unproved. The court declined to restrain invocation of the unconditional BG absent egregious fraud or irretrievable injustice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
