<?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>2010 (6) TMI 321 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113452</link>
    <description>The court upheld the dismissal of the revision petition challenging the rejection of the application to summon a witness in relation to an audit by SEBI. The revisionist&#039;s belated attempt to summon the auditor for cross-examination was deemed unnecessary and aimed at delaying proceedings. Despite multiple opportunities provided earlier, the revisionist failed to provide satisfactory reasons for the delay, leading to the dismissal of the application. The court found no merit in the revision petition, emphasizing the lack of disclosed reasons for the delay in summoning the auditor and affirming the lower court&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 May 2012 13:20:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 321 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113452</link>
      <description>The court upheld the dismissal of the revision petition challenging the rejection of the application to summon a witness in relation to an audit by SEBI. The revisionist&#039;s belated attempt to summon the auditor for cross-examination was deemed unnecessary and aimed at delaying proceedings. Despite multiple opportunities provided earlier, the revisionist failed to provide satisfactory reasons for the delay, leading to the dismissal of the application. The court found no merit in the revision petition, emphasizing the lack of disclosed reasons for the delay in summoning the auditor and affirming the lower court&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113452</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>