Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AT allowed the appeal, holding the impugned attachment and freeze unlawful for breach of natural justice due to non-supply of relied-upon documents (RUDs) with the show-cause notice; several RUDs, including investigative reports and FIRs, were integral to the reasons to believe and were not furnished. The Tribunal found that peripheral factual disputes (shareholding quantum, timing/repayment of loans, proprietary rights, and proportionality of seizure) became moot once procedural illegality was established. The respondents are directed to return seized movable assets, digital devices and records and to de-freeze the appellant's bank accounts within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Appeal allowed.
The AT allowed the appeal, holding the impugned attachment and freeze unlawful for breach of natural justice due to non-supply of relied-upon documents (RUDs) with the show-cause notice; several RUDs, including investigative reports and FIRs, were integral to the reasons to believe and were not furnished. The Tribunal found that peripheral factual disputes (shareholding quantum, timing/repayment of loans, proprietary rights, and proportionality of seizure) became moot once procedural illegality was established. The respondents are directed to return seized movable assets, digital devices and records and to de-freeze the appellant's bank accounts within six weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.