PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding NCLT's rejection of CA No. 121/2022. It held that the NCLT order dated 18.07.2019, by which the appellant was impleaded in proceedings under ss. 241-242 based on an SFIO report, had merged into the appellate order passed by NCLAT in Company Appeal No. 215/2019, which was decided on merits. Consequently, the original NCLT order could not be invoked to seek review or recall before NCLT. The subsequent filing and withdrawal of an appeal before SC did not disturb the doctrine of merger or revive any right to challenge the NCLT order. Reliance on prior SC remand orders in similar impleadment matters was rejected, as those contentions had already been raised before SC when the appellant withdrew its appeal.
NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding NCLT's rejection of CA No. 121/2022. It held that the NCLT order dated 18.07.2019, by which the appellant was impleaded in proceedings under ss. 241-242 based on an SFIO report, had merged into the appellate order passed by NCLAT in Company Appeal No. 215/2019, which was decided on merits. Consequently, the original NCLT order could not be invoked to seek review or recall before NCLT. The subsequent filing and withdrawal of an appeal before SC did not disturb the doctrine of merger or revive any right to challenge the NCLT order. Reliance on prior SC remand orders in similar impleadment matters was rejected, as those contentions had already been raised before SC when the appellant withdrew its appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.