<?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>2022 (1) TMI 1245 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302298</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order, and found that the appellants did not violate Regulation 23 of the LODR Regulations by participating in the rescinding resolution. No costs were awarded, and the digitally signed order required compliance from the parties due to the Covid-19 pandemic.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 May 2022 21:04:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=679089" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 1245 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302298</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashed the impugned order, and found that the appellants did not violate Regulation 23 of the LODR Regulations by participating in the rescinding resolution. No costs were awarded, and the digitally signed order required compliance from the parties due to the Covid-19 pandemic.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>SEBI</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302298</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>