Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Page of 4883
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 97649 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Appellate Tribunal examined the applicability of Section 240A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to the Corporate Debtor registered as an MSME and whether the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) was ineligible u/s 29A(c) of the IBC to submit the Resolution Plan. The Adjudicating Authority had held the SRA ineligible, considering the Managing Director's control over the Corporate Debtor and Financial Creditor. However, the Appellate Tribunal observed that the Corporate Debtor's account became a Non-Performing Asset after it was registered as an MSME. Applying Section 240A, the SRA's ineligibility u/s 29A(c) cannot be reckoned when the account was declared non-performing under its management. No other ineligibility was pointed out. The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order, dismissed the Suspended Director's application, allowed the Resolution Professional's application, and approved the Resolution Plan.
The Appellate Tribunal examined the applicability of Section 240A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) to the Corporate Debtor registered as an MSME and whether the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) was ineligible u/s 29A(c) of the IBC to submit the Resolution Plan. The Adjudicating Authority had held the SRA ineligible, considering the Managing Director's control over the Corporate Debtor and Financial Creditor. However, the Appellate Tribunal observed that the Corporate Debtor's account became a Non-Performing Asset after it was registered as an MSME. Applying Section 240A, the SRA's ineligibility u/s 29A(c) cannot be reckoned when the account was declared non-performing under its management. No other ineligibility was pointed out. The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order, dismissed the Suspended Director's application, allowed the Resolution Professional's application, and approved the Resolution Plan.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.