https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110335 Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 bars coercive recovery only where the liability is actually covered by a sanctioned rehabilitation scheme. Mere pendency of rehabilitation proceedings does not suspend all recovery action, and the protection does not extend to every outstanding debt merely because an enquiry is pending. On the stated facts, the decree debt was not shown to have been included in the sanctioned scheme, so section 22 did not prevent recovery and the recovery notice was not liable to be quashed on that ground. en-us Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Apr 2014 15:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110335 Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 bars coercive recovery only where the liability is actually covered by a sanctioned rehabilitation scheme. Mere pendency of rehabilitation proceedings does not suspend all recovery action, and the protection does not extend to every outstanding debt merely because an enquiry is pending. On the stated facts, the decree debt was not shown to have been included in the sanctioned scheme, so section 22 did not prevent recovery and the recovery notice was not liable to be quashed on that ground. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 24 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=110335