https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233332 Where a confirmed auction sale of company property was later set aside, the auction purchaser was treated as entitled in principle to restitution for proved expenses incurred to improve or protect the asset, so far as those outlays added value or preserved the property for the estate. The Court rejected a blanket reimbursement claim and examined the supporting material item by item, allowing only charges shown to be necessary and beneficial, while disallowing utility consumption, liaison, and unsupported assessment charges. Liability was fastened on the second respondent, and the claim was allowed only in part, with payment ordered without interest for six weeks and thereafter at 12% on default. en-us Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Apr 2013 11:24:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233332 Where a confirmed auction sale of company property was later set aside, the auction purchaser was treated as entitled in principle to restitution for proved expenses incurred to improve or protect the asset, so far as those outlays added value or preserved the property for the estate. The Court rejected a blanket reimbursement claim and examined the supporting material item by item, allowing only charges shown to be necessary and beneficial, while disallowing utility consumption, liaison, and unsupported assessment charges. Liability was fastened on the second respondent, and the claim was allowed only in part, with payment ordered without interest for six weeks and thereafter at 12% on default. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 13 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233332