RANJIT MORE, ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
Vinod Hinigorani – Appellant
Versus
Securities & Exchange Board of India – Respondent
1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner herein is challenging the validity of the orders dated 18.12.2014 and 29.12.2014 passed by the Recovery Officer of the respondent no.1 above and further to order his release from Byculla District Prison.
2. The petitioner claims that he was a non existing Chairman of the company known as Adan Cams of Ltd. and Kolar Biotech Ltd and that he had no role in the day to day affairs and the management of the said companies.
3. The petitioner claims that the respondent had initiated recovery proceeding against him and drawn up certificate nos. 211 and 231 both dated 11.7.2014 and certificate dated 288 of 2014 dated 16.7.2014. The respondent had also issued notice of demand dated 11.7.2014 and 16.7.2014 under Rule III and Part I of second Schedule to the Income Tax Act 1961 r/w. Section 28A of the Securities and Exchange Board of India, 1992, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay dues of Rs.37,62,644/, Rs.81,98,863/and Rs.45,19,904/i. e. total aggregate of Rs.1,64,81,411/along with further interest and expenses within fifteen days from the respective notices.
4. The
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.