COMPANY LAW : Where appellants decided to wind up scheme launched under VCF regulations as per regulation 23, however, more than 5 years had elapsed and admittedly entire proceeds had not been distributed to investors, nor scheme had been wound up, therefore, there being failure on part of appellant to perform obligations under regulation 24(2) read with regulation 23(1)(2A) of VCF regulations, impugned order passed by Adjudicating Officer imposing penalty on appellant was justifiedCOMPANY LAW : Where appellants decided to wind up scheme launched under VCF regulations as per regulation 23, however, more than 5 years had elapsed and admittedly entire proceeds had not been distributed to investors, nor scheme had been wound up, therefore, there being failure on part of appellant to perform obligations under regulation 24(2) read with regulation 23(1)(2A) of VCF regulations, impugned order passed by Adjudicating Officer imposing penalty on appellant was justifiedwww.taxmann.com Latest Case LawsRead More
