2025 (11) TMI 2039

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Divan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ujjwal A. Rana, Adv., Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Himanshu Mehta, Adv., Mr. Aanchal Mullick, Adv., Mr. Chirag Nayak, Adv., Mr. Vibhor Jain, Adv., M/s. Gagrat And Co, AOR, M/s. Gagrat And Co, AOR For the Respondent(s): Mr. Puneet Jain, Sr. Adv., Mrs. Christi Jain, Adv., Mr. Mann Arora, Adv., Mr. Harsh Jain, Adv., Mr. Akriti Sharma, Adv., Mr. Om Sudhir Vidyarthi, Adv., Mr.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ovisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the '1985 Act') has not been complied with, even assuming the same is made applicable. In such view of the matter, Section 17(4) of the 1985 Act has got no application in the instant case, as it can never be a case of review. 3. To come to a conclusion about consent, which is not expressed, and therefore, implied, there has to be an adjudication. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nancial assistance under Section 19 of the 1985 Act is concerned, there is no adjudicatory role that is assigned to the BIFR under the 1985 Act, meaning thereby, the scheme can only be sanctioned with the available consent. If the consent is not available, then the only option is to explore the other modes. In such view of the matter, we find no error warranting interference with the impugned orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is was done in pursuance of the notification dated 22.02.2002 by the respondent-State. The Draft Rehabilitation Scheme framed by the BIFR also included the incentive of 75% service tax exemption. It is a case where the appellant has construed the stand taken by the respondent-State in a different way. The corrigendum issued by the BIFR dated 27.05.2004 has also become final. Even thereafter, the a....