<?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>2002 (5) TMI 843 - Company Law Board</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170956</link>
    <description>In summary proceedings under company law, allegations that an affidavit and transfer deed were false or fabricated could not be acted on without a categorical finding by a competent authority establishing falsity or fabrication. The Board held that the earlier dispute had already been examined on merits, the materials did not prove the alleged falsity, and no further proceedings could be initiated on that basis. Penal provisions relating to false evidence also could not be invoked because they presupposed a clear determination of fabrication or knowing use of false evidence, which was absent. Relief was therefore refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2015 12:49:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=389347" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (5) TMI 843 - Company Law Board</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170956</link>
      <description>In summary proceedings under company law, allegations that an affidavit and transfer deed were false or fabricated could not be acted on without a categorical finding by a competent authority establishing falsity or fabrication. The Board held that the earlier dispute had already been examined on merits, the materials did not prove the alleged falsity, and no further proceedings could be initiated on that basis. Penal provisions relating to false evidence also could not be invoked because they presupposed a clear determination of fabrication or knowing use of false evidence, which was absent. Relief was therefore refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 May 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170956</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>