https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313575 The NCLAT held that when a CA files an appeal against a penalty order under Section 132(4)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 with 10% penalty deposit, the debarment order continues to operate despite the appeal. The Tribunal distinguished between monetary penalties (where consequences are stayed upon appeal filing) and debarment penalties, ruling that Rule 12's stay provisions apply only to monetary penalties. The express inclusion principle was applied - since debarment is omitted from sub-rules (1) and (2), it remains effective during appeal proceedings. The Tribunal scheduled hearings for interim relief applications. en-us Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 22 Apr 2024 20:41:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313575 The NCLAT held that when a CA files an appeal against a penalty order under Section 132(4)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 with 10% penalty deposit, the debarment order continues to operate despite the appeal. The Tribunal distinguished between monetary penalties (where consequences are stayed upon appeal filing) and debarment penalties, ruling that Rule 12's stay provisions apply only to monetary penalties. The express inclusion principle was applied - since debarment is omitted from sub-rules (1) and (2), it remains effective during appeal proceedings. The Tribunal scheduled hearings for interim relief applications. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313575