Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Insolvency and BankruptcyFebruary 20, 2024Case LawsAT
Scope and ambit of Section 29A (c) of IBC - Disqualification to submit the Resolution Plan u/s 29A - The Tribunal observed that, Section 29A, sub-section (c) does, not only disqualify, those who were in management and control of the Corporate Debtor at the time when its account was declared NPA, but also disqualifies those, who were in management and control of the Corporate Debtor and in close proximity of time, before submission of Resolution Plan, who failed to clear the debts of the Corporate Debtor. - The NCLAT analyzed the MoU and subsequent actions by the appellant, concluding that the appellant had de facto control over the corporate debtor, including the right to nominate directors and make significant management decisions. This control started from the date of the MoU, making the appellant ineligible under Section 29A.
Scope and ambit of Section 29A (c) of IBC - Disqualification to submit the Resolution Plan u/s 29A - The Tribunal observed that, Section 29A, sub-section (c) does, not only disqualify, those who were in management and control of the Corporate Debtor at the time when its account was declared NPA, but also disqualifies those, who were in management and control of the Corporate Debtor and in close proximity of time, before submission of Resolution Plan, who failed to clear the debts of the Corporate Debtor. - The NCLAT analyzed the MoU and subsequent actions by the appellant, concluding that the appellant had de facto control over the corporate debtor, including the right to nominate directors and make significant management decisions. This control started from the date of the MoU, making the appellant ineligible under Section 29A.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
