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...
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's order and dismissed the appeal filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) against the Operational Creditor. The key points are: The RP acted in a biased manner by rejecting the Operational Creditor's claims and accepting an Unsecured Financial Creditor's claim of a paltry sum, making the latter the sole member of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The Adjudicating Authority rightly observed that the RP's conduct needs thorough investigation. The IBBI is directed to investigate the RP's role and take necessary action. The RP is imposed a cost of Rs. 10 lakhs. The Unsecured Financial Creditor's claim of Rs. 1,05,877/- was filed after CIRP initiation, raising suspicions of backdating and unstamped documents. The Operational Creditor's claims were crystallized and admitted during CIRP initiation, and their rejection by the RP is questionable.
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's order and dismissed the appeal filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) against the Operational Creditor. The key points are: The RP acted in a biased manner by rejecting the Operational Creditor's claims and accepting an Unsecured Financial Creditor's claim of a paltry sum, making the latter the sole member of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). The Adjudicating Authority rightly observed that the RP's conduct needs thorough investigation. The IBBI is directed to investigate the RP's role and take necessary action. The RP is imposed a cost of Rs. 10 lakhs. The Unsecured Financial Creditor's claim of Rs. 1,05,877/- was filed after CIRP initiation, raising suspicions of backdating and unstamped documents. The Operational Creditor's claims were crystallized and admitted during CIRP initiation, and their rejection by the RP is questionable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.