2013 (9) TMI 990

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant. Shri Hari Ram Sharma, Mayur Goel and A.K. Jain, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER This is a miscellaneous application filed by Sh. Lalit Aggarwal, Director of the appellant company, in which mentioning that Sh. Parmod Goel is the other Director of the company and that other than the applicant and Sh. Parmod Goel, there is no other director in this company and this appeal has been ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the appellant company Sh. Parmod Goel and Sh. Lalit Aggarwal. Sh. Lalit Aggarwal has also filed an affidavit affirming that there is no authorization given to Sh. Ritesh Kumar Goel by him as Director for filing this appeal. 3. Heard both the sides. 4. The appeal memo as well as COD application have been filed by Sh. Ritesh Kumar Goel as director of the appellant company. Howeve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the appellant company. However, as mentioned above, the Commissioner's report shows that he is not the director and as per the affidavit of the applicant no authorization was given by him as Director to Sh. Ritesh Kumar Goel to file appeal on behalf of the company. Sh. Ritesh Kumar Goel who has signed this appeal as Director has, thus, wrongly represented himself as Director. Since the appeal,....