https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105330 A prior statement not to approach BIFR did not override the statutory duty to make a reference once the company became a sick industrial company after its accounts were finalised. The Gujarat High Court held that Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act required compliance with the reference procedure, and that Sections 33 and 34 governed consequences of non-compliance. The Court also found no material suppression or fraudulent conduct in the non-disclosure of the pending BRU request, accepting the explanation offered. Relief to withdraw from the earlier statement was therefore justified. en-us Fri, 23 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:56:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105330 A prior statement not to approach BIFR did not override the statutory duty to make a reference once the company became a sick industrial company after its accounts were finalised. The Gujarat High Court held that Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act required compliance with the reference procedure, and that Sections 33 and 34 governed consequences of non-compliance. The Court also found no material suppression or fraudulent conduct in the non-disclosure of the pending BRU request, accepting the explanation offered. Relief to withdraw from the earlier statement was therefore justified. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 23 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105330