https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325698 The Board determined that the erstwhile Directors were not disqualified under Sections 164 and 167 of the Companies Act, 2013, as the provisions required non-filing of financial statements for three consecutive years post-implementation. Therefore, the existing Board of Directors was deemed validly appointed and authorized to appoint Advocates. The application challenging the appointment of Advocates was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. en-us Mon, 02 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Mar 2016 06:57:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325698 The Board determined that the erstwhile Directors were not disqualified under Sections 164 and 167 of the Companies Act, 2013, as the provisions required non-filing of financial statements for three consecutive years post-implementation. Therefore, the existing Board of Directors was deemed validly appointed and authorized to appoint Advocates. The application challenging the appointment of Advocates was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 02 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325698