NPCI-based bank account validation for IEC applications and modifications enables real-time validation; incorrect details block submission or trigger ...
Creation/Invocation of pledge of securities through depository system: standardized pledge forms, notice requirement and invocation notifications to p...
Calendar Spread margin benefit for Single Stock Derivatives suspended on expiry day for expiring contracts; exchanges must implement systems and rule ...
Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
In proceedings concerning alleged fraudulent share transfers and related oppression/mismanagement allegations, the dominant issue was whether the tribunal could direct an independent forensic audit/testing of disputed documents on a prima facie view. Applying s. 424 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the NCLT Rules, it was held that natural justice requires an effective opportunity to establish one's case, and Rule 43 (calling for information/evidence) operates independently of Rule 45 (right of appearance/representation). For ordering expert testing, detailed merits analysis is unnecessary at the initial stage; a prima facie satisfaction suffices, with parties retaining the right to controvert the audit report later. The direction did not infringe any legal right, and the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
In proceedings concerning alleged fraudulent share transfers and related oppression/mismanagement allegations, the dominant issue was whether the tribunal could direct an independent forensic audit/testing of disputed documents on a prima facie view. Applying s. 424 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the NCLT Rules, it was held that natural justice requires an effective opportunity to establish one's case, and Rule 43 (calling for information/evidence) operates independently of Rule 45 (right of appearance/representation). For ordering expert testing, detailed merits analysis is unnecessary at the initial stage; a prima facie satisfaction suffices, with parties retaining the right to controvert the audit report later. The direction did not infringe any legal right, and the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.