<?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 (8) TMI 639 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397696</link>
    <description>For an NBFC, net owned fund under Explanation I to Section 45-IA must be computed by deducting investments in shares and the book value of debentures, bonds, outstanding loans and advances made to subsidiaries and group companies, to the extent specified by the statute. The master circular relied on by the petitioner was confined to exposure norms for specified financial institutions and did not govern this computation. The court also held that cancellation of the certificate of registration did not require a further opportunity to cure the shortfall, because the petitioner had already been given time to comply with regulatory directions and the proviso invoked was inapplicable where cancellation followed non-compliance under Chapter III-B.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2020 08:31:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620690" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 639 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397696</link>
      <description>For an NBFC, net owned fund under Explanation I to Section 45-IA must be computed by deducting investments in shares and the book value of debentures, bonds, outstanding loans and advances made to subsidiaries and group companies, to the extent specified by the statute. The master circular relied on by the petitioner was confined to exposure norms for specified financial institutions and did not govern this computation. The court also held that cancellation of the certificate of registration did not require a further opportunity to cure the shortfall, because the petitioner had already been given time to comply with regulatory directions and the proviso invoked was inapplicable where cancellation followed non-compliance under Chapter III-B.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>