<?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>2020 (6) TMI 360 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395985</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the application, ruling that criminal proceedings could not be stayed under Section 391(6) of the Companies Act, 1956. It determined that no criminal proceedings had been initiated against the applicant by NSDC, as no FIR had been lodged. The court clarified that the EOW&#039;s notice did not constitute a pending civil or criminal proceeding that could be stayed under the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2020 10:32:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615285" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 360 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395985</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the application, ruling that criminal proceedings could not be stayed under Section 391(6) of the Companies Act, 1956. It determined that no criminal proceedings had been initiated against the applicant by NSDC, as no FIR had been lodged. The court clarified that the EOW&#039;s notice did not constitute a pending civil or criminal proceeding that could be stayed under the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>