<?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>1997 (11) TMI 544 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292470</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court expressed concern over government inaction in addressing alleged mismanagement in a company&#039;s affairs. The Court appointed a Chartered Accountant to examine the company&#039;s accounts due to lack of action by government agencies. It emphasized the need for independent examination to address the mismanagement allegations. The Central Government was directed to provide details of any action taken. The Court invoked its jurisdiction under Article 32 and Article 142, expecting Executive action post-intervention. The Company was instructed to deposit funds for the examination, and alienation of assets was prohibited until the report submission. Further proceedings were scheduled post-report submission.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Dec 2020 09:54:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=631195" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (11) TMI 544 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292470</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court expressed concern over government inaction in addressing alleged mismanagement in a company&#039;s affairs. The Court appointed a Chartered Accountant to examine the company&#039;s accounts due to lack of action by government agencies. It emphasized the need for independent examination to address the mismanagement allegations. The Central Government was directed to provide details of any action taken. The Court invoked its jurisdiction under Article 32 and Article 142, expecting Executive action post-intervention. The Company was instructed to deposit funds for the examination, and alienation of assets was prohibited until the report submission. Further proceedings were scheduled post-report submission.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292470</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>