Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95714 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, held that the rejection of the Resolution Plan application by the Resolution Professional (RP) was improper due to non-compliance with Section 30(2)(b) and Section 30 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Adjudicating Authority can only reject a Resolution Plan if it violates Section 30(2) with proper reasons and material. The lack of specific reasons for non-compliance in the impugned order led to setting aside the decision. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to reconsider the application, allowing the RP to submit missing Minutes and Documents within two weeks to avoid further delays. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and compliance with legal requirements.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, held that the rejection of the Resolution Plan application by the Resolution Professional (RP) was improper due to non-compliance with Section 30(2)(b) and Section 30 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Adjudicating Authority can only reject a Resolution Plan if it violates Section 30(2) with proper reasons and material. The lack of specific reasons for non-compliance in the impugned order led to setting aside the decision. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to reconsider the application, allowing the RP to submit missing Minutes and Documents within two weeks to avoid further delays. The appeal was allowed, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and compliance with legal requirements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
