<?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>2004 (12) TMI 705 - COMPANY LAW BOARD NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198973</link>
    <description>The judgment dismissed the petition for investigation under Sections 235/237 of the Companies Act, 1956, as the petitioner failed to provide substantial evidence to support allegations of financial irregularities. The court found that the respondents adequately explained the claims, with Chartered Accountant certificates validating their explanations, leading to the conclusion that no investigation into the company&#039;s affairs was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2018 10:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=509169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 705 - COMPANY LAW BOARD NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198973</link>
      <description>The judgment dismissed the petition for investigation under Sections 235/237 of the Companies Act, 1956, as the petitioner failed to provide substantial evidence to support allegations of financial irregularities. The court found that the respondents adequately explained the claims, with Chartered Accountant certificates validating their explanations, leading to the conclusion that no investigation into the company&#039;s affairs was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>