https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313716 A duly registered claim for refund of sale consideration under Rule 22 remained enforceable under Section 10(2)(n) despite deletion of Rule 22 and amendment of Section 10(2)(m), because registration involved a preliminary adjudication of genuineness and entitlement. The Court also construed "cash balances lying with the Custodian" in Section 14(1)(b) as only surplus funds after meeting verified liabilities and valid claims, not the entire cash holding. Accordingly, transfer to the compensation pool could not defeat an existing registered claim, and the claimant remained entitled to refund from the Custodian's funds. en-us Thu, 19 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:06:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313716 A duly registered claim for refund of sale consideration under Rule 22 remained enforceable under Section 10(2)(n) despite deletion of Rule 22 and amendment of Section 10(2)(m), because registration involved a preliminary adjudication of genuineness and entitlement. The Court also construed "cash balances lying with the Custodian" in Section 14(1)(b) as only surplus funds after meeting verified liabilities and valid claims, not the entire cash holding. Accordingly, transfer to the compensation pool could not defeat an existing registered claim, and the claimant remained entitled to refund from the Custodian's funds. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313716