Fair market value under section 50C must reflect existing property condition, not hypothetical development, and statutory valuation steps must be foll...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2101 to 2120 of 96257 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 dismissed the appeal and upheld the rejection of the Appellant's claim by the Resolution Professional (RP) due to delay. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) had approved the resolution plan on 18.10.2021, while the Appellant filed the claim on 19.03.2022, much after the approval. The Tribunal followed the Supreme Court's judgment in M/s RPS Infra, which held that once the CoC approves the plan, no claim can be entertained, even if the Adjudicating Authority has not yet approved the plan. The Appellant's reliance on the Puneet Kaur case was rendered ineffective by the subsequent M/s RPS Infra judgment. Consequently, the Appellate Tribunal found no error in rejecting the Appellant's belated claim after the CoC's approval of the resolution plan.
The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal and upheld the rejection of the Appellant's claim by the Resolution Professional (RP) due to delay. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) had approved the resolution plan on 18.10.2021, while the Appellant filed the claim on 19.03.2022, much after the approval. The Tribunal followed the Supreme Court's judgment in M/s RPS Infra, which held that once the CoC approves the plan, no claim can be entertained, even if the Adjudicating Authority has not yet approved the plan. The Appellant's reliance on the Puneet Kaur case was rendered ineffective by the subsequent M/s RPS Infra judgment. Consequently, the Appellate Tribunal found no error in rejecting the Appellant's belated claim after the CoC's approval of the resolution plan.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
