Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 96408 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.