Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
The Tribunal dismissed the application seeking to extend the...
The request to extend the Pre-packaged Insolvency Resolution Process for Kethos Tiles Private Limited was denied. Resolution plan not approved within 120 days
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Insolvency and BankruptcyJune 25, 2024Case LawsTri
The Tribunal dismissed the application seeking to extend the Pre-packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) for a Corporate Debtor beyond the specified 120-day period as mandated by Section 54D of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. No Resolution Plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors within the stipulated time frame, leading to the termination of the PPIRP. The Resolution Professional's reliance on Section 12 of the IBC, 2016 was not accepted. The Tribunal found that the Resolution Professional had not fulfilled obligations under the code, leading to the rejection of the application, termination of the PPIRP, and release of the Corporate Debtor from legal proceedings.
The Tribunal dismissed the application seeking to extend the Pre-packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) for a Corporate Debtor beyond the specified 120-day period as mandated by Section 54D of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. No Resolution Plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors within the stipulated time frame, leading to the termination of the PPIRP. The Resolution Professional's reliance on Section 12 of the IBC, 2016 was not accepted. The Tribunal found that the Resolution Professional had not fulfilled obligations under the code, leading to the rejection of the application, termination of the PPIRP, and release of the Corporate Debtor from legal proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
