https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414952 The tribunal held that RPD was not acting as an agent of ANS when collecting amounts from the Appellants. It was concluded that there was no jural relationship between the Appellants and ANS, as RPD failed to deposit the collected amounts in the designated joint account. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeals, affirming the rejection of the Appellants' claims by the RP and the Adjudicating Authority, with no order as to costs. en-us Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Nov 2021 06:08:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414952 The tribunal held that RPD was not acting as an agent of ANS when collecting amounts from the Appellants. It was concluded that there was no jural relationship between the Appellants and ANS, as RPD failed to deposit the collected amounts in the designated joint account. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeals, affirming the rejection of the Appellants' claims by the RP and the Adjudicating Authority, with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 18 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414952