Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Insolvency and BankruptcyAugust 29, 2024Case LawsAT
The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that there was no infirmity in the Adjudicating Authority's order rejecting the application to set aside the resolution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) approving the Resolution Plan. The Appellant had previously challenged the same Resolution Plan in a separate application, which was dismissed by the NCLT and affirmed up to the Supreme Court. The Adjudicating Authority had rightly concluded that by allowing the 30-day extension and excluding the period of pendency of the Resolution Professional's application for seeking extension, the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC after the expiry of the CIRP period was valid.
The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that there was no infirmity in the Adjudicating Authority's order rejecting the application to set aside the resolution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) approving the Resolution Plan. The Appellant had previously challenged the same Resolution Plan in a separate application, which was dismissed by the NCLT and affirmed up to the Supreme Court. The Adjudicating Authority had rightly concluded that by allowing the 30-day extension and excluding the period of pendency of the Resolution Professional's application for seeking extension, the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC after the expiry of the CIRP period was valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
