https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111893 The court dismissed the appeal, holding that section 458A of the Companies Act should be read with section 543(2) for computing the limitation period for misfeasance proceedings. The proceedings filed by the Official Liquidator were not barred by limitation, as section 458A allows for the exclusion of specific periods in computing the limitation period. The court approved the Bombay High Court's judgment and disagreed with the Karnataka and Orissa High Courts' interpretations. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111893 The court dismissed the appeal, holding that section 458A of the Companies Act should be read with section 543(2) for computing the limitation period for misfeasance proceedings. The proceedings filed by the Official Liquidator were not barred by limitation, as section 458A allows for the exclusion of specific periods in computing the limitation period. The court approved the Bombay High Court's judgment and disagreed with the Karnataka and Orissa High Courts' interpretations. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111893