{"id":253548,"date":"2021-09-02T12:00:36","date_gmt":"2021-09-02T06:30:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=253548"},"modified":"2021-09-08T13:26:29","modified_gmt":"2021-09-08T07:56:29","slug":"tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/","title":{"rendered":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021"},"content":{"rendered":"<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">Here\u2019s a run-through of all the significant decisions covered in the month of August 2021 under the Section of Tribunals\/Commission\/Regulatory Bodies.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Armed Forces Tribunal<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-198586 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/logo.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Change in DoB cannot be claimed as a matter of right merely because the same had been changed in academic records<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Division Bench of Justice Umesh Chandra Srivastava and Vice Admiral Abhay Raghunath Karve, Member (A) held that a government servant cannot claim change in Date of Birth as a matter of right merely because the same had been changed in academic records.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kLtscl\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kLtscl<\/a><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Central Administrative Tribunal<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-215195 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/CAT.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Premature retirement does not amount to punishment; Tribunal cannot go into adequacy where adverse facts exist against the employee<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\">\u201cThe Tribunal can certainly interfere with the order of premature retirement in case there does not exist anything adverse to the employee in his entire career. However, if some material or facts as such exist, the Tribunal cannot go into the adequacy thereof.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kHjXuN\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kHjXuN<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-201689 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Whether service tax is payable on liquidated damages and penalties recovered under the contract? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of Dilip Gupta (President) and P.V. Subba Rao (Technical Member) allowed the appeals which were related to demand of service tax on liquidated damages recovered by the appellant for acts of default, like delayed or deficient supplies by various suppliers.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kLwFZG\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kLwFZG<\/a><\/strong><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Does Rule 4(5)(a) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2002 cover the return of waste and scraps and is it subject to Central Excise duty? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member) allowed an appeal which was filed aggrieved by the order-in-original asking the appellants for recovery of Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs 16,22,501 along with the appropriate interest and proportionate penalty.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kH1oXL\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kH1oXL<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Is Service Tax chargeable on the services rendered by the foreman in the chit fund business? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\">\u00a0\u201c\u2026when there was no question of liability to Service Tax, then, any amount collected under the guise of Service Tax becomes a collection of the said amount without the authority of law and the Revenue can never, therefore, claim any right over such amount; the same will have to be refunded forthwith to the concerned person.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kHll0t\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kHll0t<\/a><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Is there a requirement to pay 10% of value of exempted goods in terms of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of Ramesh Nair (Judicial Member) and Raju (Technical Member) allowed the appeal in which the issue was that whether the appellant was required to pay 10% of value of exempted goods in terms of Rule 6(3) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3gSIMTx\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3gSIMTx<\/a><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>If the ownership of gold is proved to the customs, can it still be penalized? Tribunal upholds confiscation of gold concealed inside the inner garment<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S.S. Garg (Judicial Member) partly allowed an appeal which was filed aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) whereby the Commissioner(Appeals) had rejected the appeal upholding the Order-in-Original.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3zGIIO4\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3zGIIO4<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Whether the service tax can be demanded on the construction of houses for rehabilitation of poor people under JNNURM? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of Anil Choudhary (Judicial Member) and P. Anjani Kumar (Technical Member) allowed an appeal which was filed with the main issue of as to whether the service tax have been rightly demanded on the appellant who had constructed houses for rehabilitation of poor people under JNNURM.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jyy6Ln\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jyy6Ln<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Tribunal discusses distinction between mere provision of \u2018table space\u2019 and actual rendering of service; Non discharge of tax liability as provider of \u201cbusiness auxiliary service\u201d partly allowed<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of CJ Mathew (Technical Member) and Ajay Sharma (Judicial Member) partly allowed an appeal which was filed with the issue of non-discharge of tax liability of Rs.17,46,066\/-, as provider of \u2018business auxiliary service\u2019, for the period between April 2007 and January 2012 which was confirmed by the original authority as payable under proviso to Section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994, along with interest thereon under section 75 of Finance Act, 1994, besides imposing penalties under Section 76, 77 and 78 of Finance Act, 1994.<strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/38tptM5\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/38tptM5<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Can service tax be charged on the commission which is the difference between the telephone recharge amount received from customers and amount out of the same paid to telecom companies? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WFu4YL\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WFu4YL<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Can input services used by the provider of taxable service for providing output service be covered by the exclusion clause? Tribunal answers<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3BA3m2L\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3BA3m2L<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Central Information Commission<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-22383 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/central_information_commission.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Centre\u2019s denial on information relating to committee set up to ensure adequate availability of medical oxygen during COVID-19, is justified? Succinct Report<\/strong><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For a CPIO to be able to ascertain the impediment to life and liberty of a person, there ought to be some consideration between the information seeker and the person whose life and liberty is at stake.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yAwuoS\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yAwuoS<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-251533 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-25.jpg 1331w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>While seeking a refund of amount from builder, will he be liable to pay amount paid as EMIs towards loan sanctioned? Read detailed report on DSCDRC\u2019s decision<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Coram of Dr Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal (President) and Anil Srivastava (Member)ordered the builder to refund the money deposited by the complainant, as a consequence of not being able to deliver the possession of flat on time. However, it was held that the builder was not liable to refund the EMI amount paid by the complainant towards loan sanctioned in favour of the complainant.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WDe9u2\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WDe9u2<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-199533 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/NCDRC_.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Whether NOIDA being a public authority could have adopted a different policy for extending construction period between same category of persons? Read on<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\">NOIDA being a public authority should have adopted uniform policy for extending period of construction between the same category of persons.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yvqjm5\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yvqjm5<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Opening Pandora\u2019s Box | Whether valuation of lost gold can be determined as on date when reimbursement is made by insurer? NCDRC determines<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\">\u00a0If the valuation of the lost gold is determined as on the date when reimbursement is made by insurer, it would open Pandora\u2019s box where the beneficiaries of such Policies may seek undue benefit by deliberately delaying reimbursements.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WHILum\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WHILum<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>National Company Law Appellate Tribunal<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-153604 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT-300x190.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"190\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT-300x190.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT-768x487.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT-248x158.jpg 248w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT-60x38.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>\u2018Acknowledgment\u2019 is based on neighboring circumstances and has nothing to do with the form-Rejects Appeal<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\">\u201c\u2026this Tribunal an irresistible, inevitable and inescapable conclusion that in respect of the loan account of the \u2018Corporate Debtor\u2019, there was an \u2018Acknowledgement of Debt\u2019 as per Section 18 and 19 of the Limitation Act, 1963\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jABlSB\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jABlSB<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Matter getting protracted, defeating the purpose of IBC; Orders NCLT to pass orders \u2018one way or the other\u2019<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of Judicial A.I.S. Cheema (The officiating Chairperson) and Dr Alok Srivastava (Technical Member) while disposing of an appeal, directed NCLT to decide the matter \u2018one way or the other\u2019, hoping that it would take up the application with \u2018all sincerity\u2019.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/38wAMTF\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/38wAMTF<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>National Company Law Tribunal<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-162604 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>NCLT Decodes | Whether working capital provided by an investor to run a restaurant would come under the ambit of Financial Debt?<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\">\u201c\u2026it was not a loan and till the achievement of the \u2018break even\u2019 the investor was to provide the Working Capital.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yFHsJL\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yFHsJL<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>NCLT rejects withdrawal application under S. 12-A IBC where corporate debtor entered into settlement only with a fraction of creditors: CIRP against Rolta India Ltd. will continue<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>\u201c\u2026Corporate Debtor is willing to pay the major part of the dues to the employees only subsequent to withdrawal of petition through the settlement jointly and\/or severally with the employees. The Bench feels that this provides an escape route to both the promoter as well as to the Corporate Debtor Company to conveniently wriggle out of the partial mini settlement at any point of time.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3ByPkyr\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3ByPkyr<\/a><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Malice Intention to start something \u2018other than insolvency\u2019 nipped- Releases the Corporate Debtor from \u2018rigors of CIRP and moratorium\u2019<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>\u2026IRP for dissolution of the Corporate Debtor \u2018cannot be accepted since the Liquidation is a pre-requisite to the Dissolution\u2019<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WQNSsx\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/2WQNSsx<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>With no prospects, substance and bleak chances of recovery, Resolution Professional seeks liquidation \u2014 With its acceptance, Nirav Modi\u2019s Firestar dooms<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>The Coram of H.V. Subba Rao (Judicial Member) and Chandra Bhan Singh (Technical Member) while allowing the application for the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor by the CoC, appointed Mr Santanu T Ray as the Liquidator as provided under Section 34(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3DCrFPz\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3DCrFPz<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u2018The moment a pre-existing dispute is established, IBC disenthralls itself\u2019\u2013 Dismisses Application<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of Abni Ranjan Kumar Sinha, (Judicial Member) and L.N. Gupta (Technical Member) dismissed an application considering the pre-existing dispute and on failure to prove that the operational debt was undisputed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3DEk7vA\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3DEk7vA<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Evaluation of CoC wisdom, beyond the purview of NCLT-Is, expected \u2018just\u2019 to initiate liquidation process rather<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Coram of Madan B Gosavi (Judicial Member) and Veera Brahma Rao Arekapudi (Technical Member) was of the view that the pertinent case was a fit case to pass liquidation order in consonance with the commercial wisdom in terms of Section 33(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code).<strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yCJREY\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yCJREY<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Bulldozed \u2018Building Restructure Plan\u2019: Orders insolvency instead<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>The Coram of Justice R. Sucharitha (Judicial Member) and Anil Kumar B (Technical Member) was of the opinion that the proposed settlement plan resembled more to a \u2018Business Restructuring Plan\u201d, and thus based on ambiguity, dismissed the application. The application had originally sought for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor in case of any default in the proposed Settlement Plan.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kP46u7\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kP46u7<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Securities Appellate Tribunal<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-209781 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-440x293.jpg 440w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-650x433.jpg 650w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-886x590.jpg 886w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI-60x40.jpg 60w, https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/SAT-MUMBAI.jpg 1330w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>The word \u2018liquid instrument\u2019 wide enough to include ICDs while \u2018Corporate\u2019 substantiates the Prospectus: States assumption \u2018stretched a bit too far\u2019<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>The word \u2018including\u2019 is a term of extension. It imports addition and is generally used to enlarge the meaning of the preceding words. Therefore, it could include any other debt instrument such as ICDs. \u201cLiquid instrument\u201d means an instrument which is easily tradable, ie, an instrument which is available at the drop of a hat. An instrument which can be securely, and quickly exchanged for legal tender or which can be converted to hard cash or which can be readily converted to cash. The mere fact that the word \u201cICDs\u201d was not indicated specifically in the interim use of funds in the prospectus does not mean that the interim use of funds cannot be deployed in the ICDs and can only be deployed to such instruments which were indicated in the prospectus\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3gU2oH4\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3gU2oH4<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><strong>Securities Exchange Board of India<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"size-medium wp-image-37831 alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/03\/security-exchange-board-of-india-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"300\" height=\"200\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Titan on Insider Trading-Violations by 6 employees of TCL attracts Penalty | Holds-contravention disregards both honest and dishonest ignorance<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\"><strong>&#8220;<\/strong>As postulated by legal maxim \u2018ignorantia juris non excusat\u2019, ignorance of law is no excuse and everyone is presumed to know the law of the land. A person cannot defend his illegal actions by stating that he was not aware his actions were illegal, even if he honestly believed that they were not breaking the law\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kLHPxr\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3kLHPxr<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>On not finding any justifiable reason to revoke interim ex-parte order, continues to stand\u2013Protects the interests of investors<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Madhabi Puri Bach, Whole Time Member, on not finding any justifiable reason to revoke or modify the directions issued against the Noticee concluded that the findings in the interim order continue to stand at\u00a0<em>prima facie\u00a0<\/em>level, was of the opinion that the Noticee was\u00a0<em>prima facie<\/em>, in contravention of various provisions of the IA Regulations and the PFUTP Regulations, as outlined in the Interim Order.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/2Vb9P4U\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/2Vb9P4U<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Carrying out mutual funds with DGP scheme and an Investment Adviser but with no registration | Orders to pay the amount along with several other restrictions<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">G Mahalingam, Whole Time Member, considering the factual chain and evidence directed the Noticees to cease and desist from sponsoring and\/ or carrying out activities of a mutual fund and as investment advisers, including the activity of representing through any media (physical or digital) schemes for collection of funds, directly or indirectly along with the liability to pay jointly or severally the due amount of Rs. 87,33,17,200 to the investors along with certain other restrictions.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3DF9skA\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3DF9skA<\/a><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Deliberate act of creating fictitious volumes distorting market equilibrium suffers a monetary penalty even in the absence of disproportionate gains<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Maninder Cheema, Adjudicating Officer, while affirming the violations under Regulation 3 (a), (b), (c), (d) and 4 (1) and 4(2)(a) of PFUTP Regulations, imposed a monetary penalty of \u00a0Rupees Five Lakh, under Section 15-I of SEBI Act.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3BAlEBi\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3BAlEBi<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Specious Portfolio, Spurious Manager -Deceptive Portfolio Manager with a real-looking-fake website caught and handled suitably<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>S.K. Mohanty, Whole Time Member while exercising the powers under Sections 11, 11(4),11B (1) and 11D, read with of Section 19 of the SEBI Act, 1992 and regulation 11 of the PFUTP Regulations, 2003, while disposing of the allegations levelled in the interim order held, the Noticees shall within a period of three months, refund the money received from the clients\/investors\/complainant, as fees or consideration or in any other form, in respect of their unregistered investment advisory activities and portfolio management services, with certain other restrictions and compliances.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3n2LoSu\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3n2LoSu<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Jammu &amp; Kashmir government exempted from Takeover regulations for the proposed acquisition of equity shares of Jammu and Kashmir Bank<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">S.K. Mohanty, Whole Time Member, exempted the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, from complying with the requirements of Regulation 3(2) of the Takeover Regulations with respect to the Proposed Acquisition of 6.06% equity shares in the Target Company viz., Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited during the Financial Year 2021-22, through the proposed preferential allotment as mentioned in the Application<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jy8HBD\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jy8HBD<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>To bring the proceedings initiated to a logical conclusion-Certificate of registration fails to survive<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>G Mahalingam, Whole Time Member while exercising the powers conferred under Section 19 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 read with Regulation 27 of the SEBI (Intermediaries) Regulations, 2008 cancelled the certificate of registration granted Sai Soft Securities Private Limited.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yAclzb\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3yAclzb<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>To insulate the interest of the investors from impostures \u2014 Issues order for debarment<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><span style=\"color: #008080;\">Section 11 of SEBI Act casts a duty on the Board to protect the interests of investors in securities and to promote the development of and to regulate the securities market\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jAhBP9\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3jAhBP9<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Failure to furnish the mandate results in restriction from the market which became a mandate thereafter<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong>\u201c \u2026penalty under Sections 15A(a) and 15HB of the SEBI Act, 1992, only, is attracted and not the penalties under Section 15HA of SEBI Act, 1992 and Sections 23E and 23H of 78 SCRA, 1956\u201d.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3mWd9fO\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3mWd9fO<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>ZEE insider trading: Interim ex-parte order bars 15 entities<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">\u201cThe insider trading activity not only causes notional monetary loss to investors but also has the effect of interfering with the development of securities market, as investor tend to lose faith in the securities market. The same is detrimental to the development of the securities market and qualifies as an \u201cirreparable injury. The objective of SEBI as enshrined in the SEBI Act is not only the protection of investors but also orderly development of securities market\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Read more here: <a style=\"color: #000000;\" href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/2YaBsvW\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/2YaBsvW<\/a><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><strong>Unambiguous Supreme Court, Univocal SEBI | Believes and balked, mens rea to shudder provisions of Chapter VI A- If imputes would impede<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008080;\"><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">\u201c\u2026mens rea is not an essential element for imposing penalty under Chapter VI A of the SEBI Act. The Supreme Court has unambiguously stated that imputing mens rea into the provisions of Chapter VIA is against the plain language of the Statute and frustrates entire purpose and object of introducing Chapter VIA to give teeth to the SEBI to secure strict compliance of the Act and the Regulations\u201d.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Read more here:<\/strong> <a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/3zz2c7f\">https:\/\/bit.ly\/3zz2c7f<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Here\u2019s a run-through of all the significant decisions covered in the month of August 2021 under the Section of Tribunals\/Commission\/Regulatory Bodies. Armed <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":253551,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[45673,46957],"tags":[46894,33557,46895],"class_list":["post-253548","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-columns-for-roundup","category-tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup","tag-legal-round-up","tag-monthly-roundup","tag-tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup\" \/>\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\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/\" \/>\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=\"2021-09-02T06:30:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2021-09-08T07:56:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 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\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/\",\"name\":\"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-09-02T06:30:36+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-09-08T07:56:29+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021\"}]},{\"@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\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021 | SCC Times","description":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup","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\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021","og_description":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-09-02T06:30:36+00:00","article_modified_time":"2021-09-08T07:56:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/","name":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg","datePublished":"2021-09-02T06:30:36+00:00","dateModified":"2021-09-08T07:56:29+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | August 2021"}]},{"@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\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-89.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":252103,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/31\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup-july-2021\/","url_meta":{"origin":253548,"position":0},"title":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | July 2021","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 31, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Here\u2019s a run-through of all the significant decisions covered in the month of July, 2021 under the Section of Tribunals\/Commission\/Regulatory Bodies. Appellate Tribunal for Electricity \u00a0 Solar Project Whether there was bona fide delay in commissioning the solar power project? \u201c\u2026allowed an appeal which was filed against the Order of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-37.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":303449,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/04\/tribunal-monthly-roundup-september-2023-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":253548,"position":1},"title":"Tribunal Monthly Roundup September 2023 | Top Stories on Estoppel by Election; compensation for lost property documents; ABC Bearings and Timken India amalgamation and more","author":"Editor","date":"October 4, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from Tribunals, Regulatory Bodies, Commissions this month.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legal RoundUp&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"tribunal monthly rounup sep 2023","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/tribunal-monthly-rounup-sep-2023.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/tribunal-monthly-rounup-sep-2023.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/tribunal-monthly-rounup-sep-2023.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/tribunal-monthly-rounup-sep-2023.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/tribunal-monthly-rounup-sep-2023.webp?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":250530,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/30\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup-june-2021\/","url_meta":{"origin":253548,"position":2},"title":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | June 2021","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 30, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Here's a run-through of all the significant decisions covered in the month of June, 2021 under the Section of Tribunals\/Commission\/Regulatory Bodies. Armed Forces Tribunal \u2666 AFT | Pension cannot be denied for disability being less than 20% where the disability is assessed at 15-19%\u201c The assessment of disability to the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-5-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-5-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-5-5.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-5-5.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-5-5.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":258031,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/12\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup-november-2021\/","url_meta":{"origin":253548,"position":3},"title":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | November 2021","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 2, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Here\u2019s a run-through of all the significant decisions covered in the month of November 2021 under the Section of Tribunals\/Commissions\/Regulatory Bodies.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legal RoundUp&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-129.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-129.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-129.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-129.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-129.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":256625,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/11\/02\/tribunals-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup-october-2021\/","url_meta":{"origin":253548,"position":4},"title":"Tribunals\/Regulatory Bodies\/Commissions Monthly Roundup | October 2021","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 2, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Here\u2019s a run-through of all the significant decisions covered in the month of October 2021 under the Section of Tribunals\/Commission\/Regulatory Bodies.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legal RoundUp&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-113.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-113.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-113.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-113.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image-113.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":298109,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/31\/tribunal-regulatory-bodies-commissions-monthly-roundup-july-2023-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":253548,"position":5},"title":"Tribunal Monthly Roundup July 2023 | Top Stories on Illegal Sand Mining on Yamuna Bank; Mumbai Floods 2005; Tata Power; and more","author":"Apoorva","date":"July 31, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from Tribunals, Regulatory Bodies, Commissions this month","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legal RoundUp&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"tribunal monthly july 2023","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/tribunal-monthly-july-2023.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/tribunal-monthly-july-2023.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/tribunal-monthly-july-2023.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/tribunal-monthly-july-2023.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253548","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\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=253548"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/253548\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/253551"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=253548"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=253548"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=253548"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}