<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2008 (1) TMI 609 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112055</link>
    <description>The court upheld SEBI&#039;s actions as legal and valid, dismissing the petition challenging SEBI&#039;s proceedings as arbitrary. It concluded that the automatic withdrawal of recognition under Section 5(2) of the Act due to the failure to complete the demutualisation process within the specified time was mandatory. The court rejected arguments regarding the extension of time and the starting point for calculating compliance, finding no fault with SEBI&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 609 - HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112055</link>
      <description>The court upheld SEBI&#039;s actions as legal and valid, dismissing the petition challenging SEBI&#039;s proceedings as arbitrary. It concluded that the automatic withdrawal of recognition under Section 5(2) of the Act due to the failure to complete the demutualisation process within the specified time was mandatory. The court rejected arguments regarding the extension of time and the starting point for calculating compliance, finding no fault with SEBI&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112055</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>