PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
The NCLAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed a contempt petition regarding the determination of the Resolution Professional's (RP's) fees and expenses. The Appellate Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction to determine the fees and expenses under Regulation 33(2) of CIRP Regulations 2016. The Adjudicating Authority complied with the Tribunal's direction to determine the fees. The Financial Creditor was directed to pay Rs. 7,30,000/- as RP's fee and Rs. 2,41,512/- as CIRP expenses, with a specific payment timeline. An uncalled-for direction was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of, emphasizing the Financial Creditor's liability to pay the determined amounts.
The NCLAT, an Appellate Tribunal, addressed a contempt petition regarding the determination of the Resolution Professional's (RP's) fees and expenses. The Appellate Tribunal held that the Adjudicating Authority has jurisdiction to determine the fees and expenses under Regulation 33(2) of CIRP Regulations 2016. The Adjudicating Authority complied with the Tribunal's direction to determine the fees. The Financial Creditor was directed to pay Rs. 7,30,000/- as RP's fee and Rs. 2,41,512/- as CIRP expenses, with a specific payment timeline. An uncalled-for direction was set aside, and the appeal was disposed of, emphasizing the Financial Creditor's liability to pay the determined amounts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.