https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195780 An order rejecting an application to continue holding an office or place of profit at increased remuneration was held unsustainable because it was passed without giving the petitioners a hearing, despite the civil consequences of the decision. The authority also failed to examine the petitioners' factual assertions, including disclosures about petitioner no. 2's directorships and the effect of the statements made in the application. The order was therefore set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after notice and hearing. en-us Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Nov 2017 08:09:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195780 An order rejecting an application to continue holding an office or place of profit at increased remuneration was held unsustainable because it was passed without giving the petitioners a hearing, despite the civil consequences of the decision. The authority also failed to examine the petitioners' factual assertions, including disclosures about petitioner no. 2's directorships and the effect of the statements made in the application. The order was therefore set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after notice and hearing. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195780