Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The NCLAT addressed the maintainability of a section 7...
NCLAT clarified that certain allottees must meet new criteria for filing insolvency under IBC. Allottees like appellants must adhere to rules. Appeal denied.
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
The NCLAT addressed the maintainability of a section 7 application under the IBC, focusing on the threshold set by Amendment Act 1 of 2020. It was held that allottees, including those in the Assured Returns Class of Creditors, are covered under the definition of 'allottees'. The appellants, being part of this class, had to meet the threshold criteria introduced by the amendment, which they failed to do. The Adjudicating Authority correctly determined that the appellants, as allottees, must adhere to the second proviso of Section 7(1) of IBC. The appeal was dismissed as the appellants were deemed to still fall within the ambit of 'allottees' and were required to meet the threshold for filing a section 7 application.
The NCLAT addressed the maintainability of a section 7 application under the IBC, focusing on the threshold set by Amendment Act 1 of 2020. It was held that allottees, including those in the Assured Returns Class of Creditors, are covered under the definition of 'allottees'. The appellants, being part of this class, had to meet the threshold criteria introduced by the amendment, which they failed to do. The Adjudicating Authority correctly determined that the appellants, as allottees, must adhere to the second proviso of Section 7(1) of IBC. The appeal was dismissed as the appellants were deemed to still fall within the ambit of 'allottees' and were required to meet the threshold for filing a section 7 application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.