https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779052 NCLAT found the appellant, a government official, initially held guilty of contempt for disobeying a direction and sentenced to simple imprisonment with fine, but noted the DC had earlier withheld goods. The tribunal recorded that the order dated 29.03.2023 was subsequently complied with, the respondent expressed satisfaction, and the appellants tendered an unqualified apology, asserting the breach was due to misunderstanding and not deliberate. Given compliance and no history of obstinacy, the contempt was purged, the original order set aside, and the appeal allowed. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Sep 2025 08:34:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779052 NCLAT found the appellant, a government official, initially held guilty of contempt for disobeying a direction and sentenced to simple imprisonment with fine, but noted the DC had earlier withheld goods. The tribunal recorded that the order dated 29.03.2023 was subsequently complied with, the respondent expressed satisfaction, and the appellants tendered an unqualified apology, asserting the breach was due to misunderstanding and not deliberate. Given compliance and no history of obstinacy, the contempt was purged, the original order set aside, and the appeal allowed. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779052