https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441576 A bidder in an auction sought a further extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration after already receiving a 30-day indulgence. The court held that, although it could interfere with settled auction conditions, that discretion had already been exercised once in the bidder's favour and the bidder still failed to comply fully. In those circumstances, the bidder's later willingness to pay did not justify reopening the matter or disturbing the refusal of additional time. The order declining a further extension was therefore maintained, and the relief sought was not granted. en-us Mon, 07 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Aug 2023 22:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441576 A bidder in an auction sought a further extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration after already receiving a 30-day indulgence. The court held that, although it could interfere with settled auction conditions, that discretion had already been exercised once in the bidder's favour and the bidder still failed to comply fully. In those circumstances, the bidder's later willingness to pay did not justify reopening the matter or disturbing the refusal of additional time. The order declining a further extension was therefore maintained, and the relief sought was not granted. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 07 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441576