{"id":196170,"date":"2018-05-21T12:52:28","date_gmt":"2018-05-21T07:22:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=196170"},"modified":"2018-06-29T15:05:11","modified_gmt":"2018-06-29T09:35:11","slug":"sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/","title":{"rendered":"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms"},"content":{"rendered":"

Securities Appellate Tribunal:<\/strong> The SAT has held that an extension provided by the Board of Industrial Finance Reconstruction (\u201cBIFR\u201d) to dilute shareholding of company executives is not an extension for compliance with Minimum Public Shareholding (\u201cMPS\u201d) norms unless expressly stated.<\/p>\n

The appellant company filed before BIFR which declared the appellant a \u2018sick company\u2019 under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act (\u201cSICA\u201d) and formulated a plan for its revival, which failed, following which a modified rehabilitation scheme was proposed by the BIFR, allowing time beyond SEBI guidelines to the appellant to undertake dilution of the director and promoters\u2019 shareholding.<\/p>\n

Rule 19A mandating an MPS floor of 25% for listed companies was inserted in the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Rules (\u201cSCRR\u201d) in June 2010. A Whole Time Member (\u201cWTM\u201d) of the SEBI passed an order against the appellant for non-compliance with this rule, following which the appellant took appropriate steps to fulfil the MPS requirement and the WTM\u2019s order was changed from one of non-compliance to delayed compliance, on which the Adjudicating Officer (\u201cAO\u201d) imposed a penalty of Rs. 7.5 lacs under Section 23E of the Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act (\u201cSCRA\u201d).<\/p>\n

It was contended by the appellant that:<\/p>\n

i. The BIFR had granted the appellant time extending beyond the guidelines provided by SEBI for diluting shareholding of the directors etc., and the MPS requirement had been fulfilled within the time period stipulated by the BIFR in its\u00a0rehabilitation plan, hence the SEBI\u2019s order holding the appellant liable for non-compliance was erroneous.<\/p>\n

ii. Alternatively, the MPS requirements had, in fact, been achieved in September 2013 but the AO in his order held the same to have been completed in September 2014, hence the penalty imposed was incorrect.<\/p>\n

The counsel for SEBI argued that since Rule 19A was not in existence on the day the order by the BIFR was passed, the latter\u2019s order giving extended time to the appellant to dilute shareholding cannot be construed as an extension for compliance with the MPS norms as well, as the BIFR cannot be said to have known on the date of its order in 2008 that a rule such as 19A shall be inserted at a later date (in 2010).<\/p>\n

The SAT accepted the contention by SEBI and held that unless the BIFR had issued an order clearly stating an extension for compliance with MPS norms, the AO\u2019s order cannot be considered incorrect.\u00a0However, the SAT also took notice of documentary evidence produced by the appellant showing that the MPS norms had actually been complied with by September 2013 and not by September 2014, as was held in the orders by the WTM and the AO. This error was due to the appellant\u2019s own failure in producing before the aforesaid authorities correct representations of their shareholding patterns, leading the WTM and the AO to believe that the 25% MPS had not been achieved.<\/p>\n

Regardless, since the MPS had been achieved within stipulated time and considering the fact that the appellant was a sick company, the SAT, though held the appellant guilty for violating rule 19A of the SCRR, reduced the penalty from Rs 7.5 lacs to Rs 2 lacs and dismissed the appeal. [Neycer India Limited v. Securities and Exchange Board of India,2018 SCC OnLine SAT 56<\/a>, decided on 16-05-2018]<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Securities Appellate Tribunal: The SAT has held that an extension provided by the Board of Industrial Finance Reconstruction (\u201cBIFR\u201d) to dilute shareholding <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":30221,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-196170","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies"],"yoast_head":"\nSAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Securities Appellate Tribunal: The SAT has held that an extension provided by the Board of Industrial Finance Reconstruction (\u201cBIFR\u201d) to dilute shareholding\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-05-21T07:22:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-29T09:35:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/\",\"name\":\"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-05-21T07:22:28+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-29T09:35:11+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms","og_description":"Securities Appellate Tribunal: The SAT has held that an extension provided by the Board of Industrial Finance Reconstruction (\u201cBIFR\u201d) to dilute shareholding","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-05-21T07:22:28+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-29T09:35:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/","name":"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg","datePublished":"2018-05-21T07:22:28+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-29T09:35:11+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/21\/sat-extension-provided-for-dilution-of-shareholding-not-to-be-construed-as-an-extension-for-compliance-with-mps-norms\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"SAT: Extension provided for dilution of shareholding not to be construed as an extension for compliance with MPS norms"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/appoointment.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":217946,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/12\/sat-penalty-imposed-on-appellants-for-violation-of-scra-waived-off-by-bse-matter-remanded-for-fresh-adjudication\/","url_meta":{"origin":196170,"position":0},"title":"SAT | Penalty imposed on appellants for\u00a0violation of SCRA waived off by BSE; matter remanded for fresh adjudication","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 12, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT), Mumbai:\u00a0Coram of Justice Tarun Agarwala, (Presiding Officer), Dr C.K.G. Nair (Member), and Justice M.T. Joshi, (Judicial Member) directed an Adjudicating Officer to look into a matter afresh since BSE waived off the penalty imposed by them on the appellants. The appellant, in this case, failed to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":241772,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/05\/sebi-whether-a-company-can-be-exempted-from-minimum-public-shareholding-requirement-and-whether-requirement-of-receiving-consent-of-at-least-90-of-public-shareholders-of-a-company-for-delisting-can\/","url_meta":{"origin":196170,"position":1},"title":"SEBI | Whether a company be exempted from min. public shareholding requirement and whether requirement of receiving 90% shareholders’ consent for Delisting be relaxed? SEBI replies in affirmative","author":"Editor","date":"January 5, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Security and Exchange Board of India (SEBI): S. K. Mohanty, (Whole Time Member) granted exemptions to the United Provinces Sugar Company Ltd. from the requirements of complying with Minimum Public Shareholding (\u201cMPS\u201d) norms as mandated under rule 19 (2) (b) of provisions of Securities Contracts (Regulations) Rules, 1957 (\u201cSCRR\u201d) and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":234899,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/08\/27\/sat-reason-for-bringing-in-a-minimum-pubic-shareholding-requirement-under-securities-contracts-regulations-rules-is-to-ensure-non-concentration-of-shares-at-the-hands-of-a-single-person-or-a-group\/","url_meta":{"origin":196170,"position":2},"title":"SAT | Reason for bringing in a minimum public shareholding requirement under Securities Contracts (Regulations) Rules is to ensure non-concentration of shares at the hands of a single person or a group of persons","author":"Editor","date":"August 27, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Securities Appellate Tribunal: The Coram of Tarun Aggarwal (Presiding Officer), C.K.G Nair (Member) and M.T. Joshi (Judicial Officer) dismissed the appeal of the appellant and upheld the impugned order by SEBI. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal are that the appellant is a public limited company\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":54441,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/02\/no-proceedings-against-the-assets-of-the-company-can-be-taken-before-any-decision-is-taken-by-the-bifr\/","url_meta":{"origin":196170,"position":3},"title":"No proceedings against the assets of the company can be taken before any decision is taken by the BIFR","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 2, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court : While dealing with the issue relating to jurisdiction of BIFR in winding up proceedings, the Court held that winding up proceedings before the Company Court cannot continue after a reference has been registered by the BIFR and an enquiry has been initiated under Section 16 of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/DSC_5487.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":285008,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/24\/period-of-suspension-of-legal-proceedings-is-excludable-in-computing-the-period-of-limitation-for-enforcement-of-right-in-terms-of-s-225-sica-supreme-court-legal-research-lega\/","url_meta":{"origin":196170,"position":4},"title":"Period of suspension of legal proceedings is excludable in computing limitation period for enforcement of right under Section 22(5), SICA: Supreme Court","author":"Apoorva","date":"February 24, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court held that the period of suspension of legal proceedings is excludable in computing the period of limitation for the enforcement of such right in terms of Section 22(5), SICA. Further, the dismissal of the application under Section 9, IBC on the ground of \u2018pre-existing dispute\u2019 cannot be held\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-526.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":174974,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/11\/delhi-high-court-upholds-vires-s-4b-sick-industrial-companies-special-provisions-repeal-act-2003\/","url_meta":{"origin":196170,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court upholds the vires of S. 4(b) of Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003","author":"Saba","date":"December 11, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sanjiv Khanna and Pratibha M. Singh, JJ dismissed a writ petition before it which challenged the constitutional validity of Section 4(b) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 (hereinafter the \u2018Repeal Act\u2019). The petitioner claimed to be engaged in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196170","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=196170"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196170\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/30221"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=196170"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=196170"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=196170"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}