https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103663 A reference under section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act remained valid despite the appellant's suppression of facts before the High Court, because there was no suppression before the BIFR and any grievance about fraud had to be pursued before the High Court itself. Section 22 barred further coercive steps once a duly registered reference was followed by the simultaneous calling for information or documents under amended regulation 19(5), as that stage marked commencement of the section 16 inquiry. The High Court's orders appointing a receiver and confirming the provisional liquidator were therefore not sustainable. en-us Tue, 05 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Jul 2014 11:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103663 A reference under section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies Act remained valid despite the appellant's suppression of facts before the High Court, because there was no suppression before the BIFR and any grievance about fraud had to be pursued before the High Court itself. Section 22 barred further coercive steps once a duly registered reference was followed by the simultaneous calling for information or documents under amended regulation 19(5), as that stage marked commencement of the section 16 inquiry. The High Court's orders appointing a receiver and confirming the provisional liquidator were therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 05 May 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103663