Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Withdrawal of CIRP - The NCLAT emphasized that withdrawal of CIRP necessitates an application by the applicant and approval by 90% of the Committee of Creditors (CoC), as mandated by Section 12A of the IBC. - However, it was found that Form 'FA' submitted for withdrawal was not signed by the applicant, indicating non-compliance with procedural requirements. Despite objections raised by the appellant (Joinup Corporation), the Form 'FA' was submitted by the Financial Creditor (Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited), leading to discrepancies in the submission process. - the NCLAT concluded that the withdrawal of CIRP was not conducted in accordance with the law. It set aside the impugned order and revived the CIRP proceedings.
Withdrawal of CIRP - The NCLAT emphasized that withdrawal of CIRP necessitates an application by the applicant and approval by 90% of the Committee of Creditors (CoC), as mandated by Section 12A of the IBC. - However, it was found that Form 'FA' submitted for withdrawal was not signed by the applicant, indicating non-compliance with procedural requirements. Despite objections raised by the appellant (Joinup Corporation), the Form 'FA' was submitted by the Financial Creditor (Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Limited), leading to discrepancies in the submission process. - the NCLAT concluded that the withdrawal of CIRP was not conducted in accordance with the law. It set aside the impugned order and revived the CIRP proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
