Terminal gate verification for transshipment containers shifts to operators, while Customs controls and discrepancy reporting requirements remain mand...
The NCLAT allowed the company appeal, quashed the impugned NCLT order and remitted the petition to the NCLT, Hyderabad Bench for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal concluded that proceedings under ss. 241, 242, 213 and 119 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rr. 11, 23 and 43 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 were vitiated by denial of an effective opportunity of hearing, breaching principles of natural justice. Because the Respondents conceded the defect, the matter is returned for reconsideration solely on its merits based on the material on record, and no determination on substance was made by the NCLAT.
The NCLAT allowed the company appeal, quashed the impugned NCLT order and remitted the petition to the NCLT, Hyderabad Bench for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal concluded that proceedings under ss. 241, 242, 213 and 119 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rr. 11, 23 and 43 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 were vitiated by denial of an effective opportunity of hearing, breaching principles of natural justice. Because the Respondents conceded the defect, the matter is returned for reconsideration solely on its merits based on the material on record, and no determination on substance was made by the NCLAT.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
