Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellant (erstwhile resolution professional) was entitled to liquidator fees at the rates of the first/second bucket or third bucket under Regulation 4(2) of the CIRP (Liquidation) Regulations, 2016 and whether amounts withdrawn in excess are liable to be refunded with GST and interest.
Analysis: The adjudicating authority examined the invoices and the appellant's computation and excluded an aggregate period of 495 days (including COVID-19 related closure and other claimed exemptions) for determining the effective period of liquidation. The appellant sought additional exclusion of 141 days for resumption of auctions after a medical accident; that exclusion was not supported by record. On the appellant's own timeline the realisations occurred after one year from the liquidation commencement date and therefore the applicable fee rates correspond to the third bucket under Regulation 4(2). Detailed arithmetic in the impugned order applied the third-bucket percentages to the net realisations and distributions, computed total fees payable, compared the sum already withdrawn by the appellant, and identified an excess withdrawal. The adjudicating authority directed refund of the excess amount plus GST and interest at 12% p.a. where not paid within the prescribed period.
Conclusion: The appellant is not entitled to fees at the first or second bucket rates; fees are payable as per the third bucket under Regulation 4(2) of the CIRP (Liquidation) Regulations, 2016. The amounts withdrawn in excess are liable to be refunded with GST and interest. The appeal challenging the order is dismissed and the adjudicating authority's calculation and refund direction are upheld.