Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
