https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458165 Section 29(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was interpreted to permit ex post facto and conditional approval, because the statute used "permission" without limiting it to prior consent; the later press release, circular and permission were therefore treated as valid clarifications of the portfolio investment scheme. On the challenge of mala fides, the Reserve Bank, the Union Government and the Life Insurance Corporation were found not to have acted arbitrarily or without application of mind, and the shareholder requisition for an extraordinary general meeting was upheld as part of the company law framework. The matter was remitted to the Reserve Bank for fresh inquiry into the purchases and the conduct of the designated bank. en-us Thu, 19 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Oct 2024 18:13:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458165 Section 29(1)(b) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was interpreted to permit ex post facto and conditional approval, because the statute used "permission" without limiting it to prior consent; the later press release, circular and permission were therefore treated as valid clarifications of the portfolio investment scheme. On the challenge of mala fides, the Reserve Bank, the Union Government and the Life Insurance Corporation were found not to have acted arbitrarily or without application of mind, and the shareholder requisition for an extraordinary general meeting was upheld as part of the company law framework. The matter was remitted to the Reserve Bank for fresh inquiry into the purchases and the conduct of the designated bank. Case-Laws FEMA Thu, 19 Dec 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458165