TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 231
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpugned order dated 29.10.2025, that was rendered in CA No.80/2025, which was preferred in CP No.131/BB/2022. 2. The Company Appeal has been reported by the Registry to be defective and it was listed today under the defects head. According to the report of the Registry there is a delay of 11 days, that has chanced in refiling the Company Appeal. Having considered the arguments extended by the learned counsel for the Appellant for justifying the delay in refiling, and being satisfied with the same, coupled with the fact that, the aspect of delay in refiling being exclusively an issue between the Appellant and the Tribunal, the delay of 11 days that has chanced in refiling the Company Appeal would stand 'condoned'. 3. Heard the Appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion restraining the Respondents from alienating or creating any third party interest in respect of their movable and immovable properties/assets disclosed by the Respondents in terms of prayer (a), during the pendency of the Company Petition No.131/2022." 5. The nature of relief, which was sought therein was that, the so-called purported act of fraud alleged in the application, a direction was sought for the disclosure of the movable and immovable assets including the bank accounts, lockers, deposits, etc., and further a prayer was made for attachment, that was sought to be made to continue attachment during the pendency of the Company Petition pursuance to the disclosure as sought for in prayer (a) and simultaneously there was also a pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en preferred under this Act. (3) The Tribunal shall send a copy of every order passed under this section to all the parties concerned." 8. If the provisions as extracted above is taken into consideration, the said provision could be invoked: (i) By the Tribunal, (ii) By the Tribunal after giving an opportunity to the parties, (iii) By the Tribunal within 2 years from the date of the order, (iv) Only for the purposes to rectify any mistake apparent from record, (v) Any order thus passed on an application under Section 420 is to be sent to all the parties concerned. 9. What could be derived from the provisions contained under Section 420 of the Companies Act is that, it is an inheren....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Section 420 of the Companies Act only within 2 years after passing the order. 10. The application under Section 420 of the Companies Act was filed by the Appellant on 24.04.2025, seeking rectification of an order dated 04.10.2024. The question that will fall for consideration is that, as to whether at all Section 420 application, could be invoked by a party to the proceedings. The answer would be "No", as Section 420, is not a provision which is made available to a party to the petition or proceedings, to seek a rectification of an order rather it is an exclusive prerogative vested with the Tribunal to correct its own order while exercising powers under Section 420. Hence, the law does not contemplate filing of any application as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pplication, where the Appellant admits that the Application was in the shape of a review. Para 3 of the application is extracted hereunder: - "3. This review petition is filed seeking for review of order dated 04.10.2024 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in C.A. No. 114/2023 in C.P. No.131/2022 allowing the Application filed by the Respondent and directing the Applicant to disclose on affidavit their movable and immovable properties/assets, Including bank accounts, lockers, deposits, demat accounts, shares, mutual funds, bonds, other Investments, including jointly held properties owned by them in India or anywhere in the world, be attached during pendency of the Company Petition No.131/2022, be attached pursuant to the disclosure....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the shape of reviewing the order, it will not be falling within the ambit of exercising of powers, for the purpose of rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, the application would not be maintainable. Thus, the application preferred by the Appellant in the shape of a review, to review an order dated 04.10.2024, that was passed on merits would not be maintainable and the rejection of the same by the impugned order dated 29.10.2025 does not call for any interference by this Appellate Tribunal, owing to the ratios which has been considered by the Tribunal with regards to the scope of exercise of powers of review under the garb of invocation of the provisions contained under Section 420 of the Companies Act and that too in the context....