https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108357 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the requirement of BIFR consent for creditor actions during pending references under Section 15 of SICA. It held that coercive measures, such as attachment notices, cannot proceed without BIFR approval as per Section 22 of SICA. The court issued an ad interim writ restraining the attachment of the petitioner's assets and instructed BIFR to expedite the disposal of the reference case within six months. This decision safeguards the petitioner's rights and underscores the significance of adhering to statutory procedures under SICA. en-us Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:28:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108357 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the requirement of BIFR consent for creditor actions during pending references under Section 15 of SICA. It held that coercive measures, such as attachment notices, cannot proceed without BIFR approval as per Section 22 of SICA. The court issued an ad interim writ restraining the attachment of the petitioner's assets and instructed BIFR to expedite the disposal of the reference case within six months. This decision safeguards the petitioner's rights and underscores the significance of adhering to statutory procedures under SICA. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108357