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...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
HC set aside the impugned appellate rejection and allowed the petition by way of remand. The appellate order had dismissed the Appeal for non-compliance with the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement based on an alleged shortfall (required ~Rs.12,76,000; deposited Rs.8.62 lakhs) without prior notice or an opportunity to remedy the deficit, thereby infringing principles of natural justice. Although the Petitioner received a hearing on the merits, the authority failed to notify the Petitioner of the procedural shortfall or afford a reasonable chance to make good the deposit. The matter is remitted to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration after giving the Petitioner notice and an opportunity to cure any shortfall.
HC set aside the impugned appellate rejection and allowed the petition by way of remand. The appellate order had dismissed the Appeal for non-compliance with the mandatory 10% pre-deposit requirement based on an alleged shortfall (required ~Rs.12,76,000; deposited Rs.8.62 lakhs) without prior notice or an opportunity to remedy the deficit, thereby infringing principles of natural justice. Although the Petitioner received a hearing on the merits, the authority failed to notify the Petitioner of the procedural shortfall or afford a reasonable chance to make good the deposit. The matter is remitted to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration after giving the Petitioner notice and an opportunity to cure any shortfall.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
