ENGLISH LEASING (COMPANY) LIMITED versus COMMISSIONER (SPECIALISED COMPANIES DIVISION), SEC
Sections 282, 282A & 282M Non-Banking Finance Companies (Establishments and Regulations) Rules, 2003, R7 Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan Act (XLII of 1997), Section 33 appeal to each director company for a fine of Rs 400,000. To impose The appellant's annual accounts for the relevant year did not reflect the true and fair picture of the company's affairs. The application was canceled by the Commission's leasing license before notification of non-banking finance companies (Establishment). And regulations) The Appellant Company of 2003 could no longer be called a non-banking finance company and it was stated that the Rolls Company further alleged that the unclean order was not a speaking order and had no reason or justification. Was not provided. The applicant's finding of the commissioner requires the applicant's non-compliance with the rules and instructions in light of the fact that the company's leasing license was revoked by the commission, but the matter is not known to the commissioner. Was not taken before and no search was made, however, it was revealed that as a commissioner, it was not an order to speak. No reason was provided for the case to be investigated, in the circumstances the Commissioner was remanded, who would pass the bid order after considering the evidence presented by the appellant in defense of the showcase notice \ r \ n \ r \ n
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
