https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430981 The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Tribunal's decision to appoint an Inspector under Section 426 of the Companies Act, 2013, due to non-cooperation from the Appellants. It found no violation of natural justice in the interim order and allowed the Tribunal to proceed with the maintainability issue. The Appellants' challenge to the interim relief directing deposit of daily collections was rejected, as it aimed to prevent fund siphoning. The Appellate Tribunal emphasized expeditious resolution of the main Company Petition to protect the assets of the 9th Respondent Company. en-us Tue, 18 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Dec 2022 05:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430981 The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Tribunal's decision to appoint an Inspector under Section 426 of the Companies Act, 2013, due to non-cooperation from the Appellants. It found no violation of natural justice in the interim order and allowed the Tribunal to proceed with the maintainability issue. The Appellants' challenge to the interim relief directing deposit of daily collections was rejected, as it aimed to prevent fund siphoning. The Appellate Tribunal emphasized expeditious resolution of the main Company Petition to protect the assets of the 9th Respondent Company. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 18 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430981