<?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>2019 (12) TMI 193 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389310</link>
    <description>The court focused on the procedural compliance with National Company Law Tribunal Rules, addressing allegations of non-compliance and discrepancies in order pronouncement. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of pronouncement, the court allowed inspection of original records by the contesting respondent. Reference to Supreme Court judgments provided additional legal context. The judgment underscored the significance of procedural integrity and legal precedent in resolving the case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Dec 2019 11:38:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (12) TMI 193 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389310</link>
      <description>The court focused on the procedural compliance with National Company Law Tribunal Rules, addressing allegations of non-compliance and discrepancies in order pronouncement. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of pronouncement, the court allowed inspection of original records by the contesting respondent. Reference to Supreme Court judgments provided additional legal context. The judgment underscored the significance of procedural integrity and legal precedent in resolving the case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>