<?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>2018 (6) TMI 1766 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295803</link>
    <description>Section 2(4) of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2004 excludes only a co-operative society owned or controlled by the State Government or the Central Government. A society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 remains a body corporate governed by its bye-laws and managed by its general body and managing committee. Mere registration, audit supervision, or regulatory oversight by the Registrar does not amount to the real, deep and pervasive State control required for exclusion. On the facts, the society was not shown to be an assisted society or otherwise under State control, so it remained within the definition of financial establishment and the request to quash the proceedings was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2021 09:33:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 1766 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295803</link>
      <description>Section 2(4) of the Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial Establishment Act, 2004 excludes only a co-operative society owned or controlled by the State Government or the Central Government. A society registered under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 remains a body corporate governed by its bye-laws and managed by its general body and managing committee. Mere registration, audit supervision, or regulatory oversight by the Registrar does not amount to the real, deep and pervasive State control required for exclusion. On the facts, the society was not shown to be an assisted society or otherwise under State control, so it remained within the definition of financial establishment and the request to quash the proceedings was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295803</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>