<?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 (5) TMI 691 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, MUMBAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126863</link>
    <description>Repeated non-compliance with company law obligations, including failure to hold annual general meetings, file annual accounts and returns, maintain statutory records, and concerns over diversion of funds and questionable asset transactions, was treated as sufficient material for a prima facie view of misconduct. Communications from the Registrar of Companies also indicated non-compliance and referral for prosecution. On that basis, circumstances suggesting fraud, misfeasance, oppression of members, and prejudice to shareholders were considered to justify an investigation into the company&#039;s affairs under section 237(b) of the Companies Act, 1956.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2013 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163749" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (5) TMI 691 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, MUMBAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126863</link>
      <description>Repeated non-compliance with company law obligations, including failure to hold annual general meetings, file annual accounts and returns, maintain statutory records, and concerns over diversion of funds and questionable asset transactions, was treated as sufficient material for a prima facie view of misconduct. Communications from the Registrar of Companies also indicated non-compliance and referral for prosecution. On that basis, circumstances suggesting fraud, misfeasance, oppression of members, and prejudice to shareholders were considered to justify an investigation into the company&#039;s affairs under section 237(b) of the Companies Act, 1956.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126863</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>