Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Where the Companies Act provides a specific appellate forum against NCLT orders, writ proceedings cannot ordinarily be used to bypass that remedy, and High Court directions on delay do not bind the Appellate Tribunal on maintainability. Section 14 of the Limitation Act applies only on proof of bona fide prosecution with due diligence and good faith; repeated pursuit of writ, appeal and review proceedings after being told the proper remedy was an NCLAT appeal defeated that requirement. Limitation had to be tested under the special statutory scheme, and time spent in review before the High Court could not extend it. The delay application was rejected and the company appeal was dismissed as time-barred.
Where the Companies Act provides a specific appellate forum against NCLT orders, writ proceedings cannot ordinarily be used to bypass that remedy, and High Court directions on delay do not bind the Appellate Tribunal on maintainability. Section 14 of the Limitation Act applies only on proof of bona fide prosecution with due diligence and good faith; repeated pursuit of writ, appeal and review proceedings after being told the proper remedy was an NCLAT appeal defeated that requirement. Limitation had to be tested under the special statutory scheme, and time spent in review before the High Court could not extend it. The delay application was rejected and the company appeal was dismissed as time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.