<?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>2005 (9) TMI 678 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279271</link>
    <description>Section 45-IA requires NBFC registration decisions to be tested only against the statutory criteria, including net owned funds and liquidity requirements. An appellate authority cannot defer or dilute a refusal by granting status quo or by relying on later developments outside those parameters, particularly where the applicant&#039;s financial incapacity to meet the mandatory conditions is already evident. The order was also internally inconsistent in purporting to keep the rejection in place while suspending its effect, and there was no basis to direct a fresh review after disposal of the appeal. The appellate order was therefore set aside and the original rejection restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2019 11:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=562325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 678 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279271</link>
      <description>Section 45-IA requires NBFC registration decisions to be tested only against the statutory criteria, including net owned funds and liquidity requirements. An appellate authority cannot defer or dilute a refusal by granting status quo or by relying on later developments outside those parameters, particularly where the applicant&#039;s financial incapacity to meet the mandatory conditions is already evident. The order was also internally inconsistent in purporting to keep the rejection in place while suspending its effect, and there was no basis to direct a fresh review after disposal of the appeal. The appellate order was therefore set aside and the original rejection restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>