https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354140 The Delhi High Court held that writ interference was not warranted at the threshold stage of NCLT contempt proceedings because the impugned orders only initiated prima facie scrutiny and did not determine guilt or impose punishment. It further held that service of the contempt application, issuance of show-cause notice, and proceeding ex parte against some respondents did not violate natural justice or the NCLT Rules, 2016, since the tribunal could regulate procedure flexibly at the preliminary stage and any service defect was at most an irregularity. en-us Tue, 09 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jan 2018 08:17:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354140 The Delhi High Court held that writ interference was not warranted at the threshold stage of NCLT contempt proceedings because the impugned orders only initiated prima facie scrutiny and did not determine guilt or impose punishment. It further held that service of the contempt application, issuance of show-cause notice, and proceeding ex parte against some respondents did not violate natural justice or the NCLT Rules, 2016, since the tribunal could regulate procedure flexibly at the preliminary stage and any service defect was at most an irregularity. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 09 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354140