Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The NCLAT held that after approval of a resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority, it becomes binding on the corporate debtor, employees, creditors, guarantors and stakeholders. The plan cannot be modified by introducing new claims, as it would prejudice the successful resolution applicant (SRA) and create uncertainty. The Adjudicating Authority lacks power to modify an approved plan unilaterally and can only suggest modifications to the Committee of Creditors (CoC). As the respondent did not challenge the plan within the prescribed time, it attained finality. The SRA made payments per the approved plan, and no non-compliance was attributed to it. Thus, the Adjudicating Authority exceeded jurisdiction by reviving and directing payment of the respondent's gratuity claims, and the NCLAT set aside those orders.
The NCLAT held that after approval of a resolution plan by the Adjudicating Authority, it becomes binding on the corporate debtor, employees, creditors, guarantors and stakeholders. The plan cannot be modified by introducing new claims, as it would prejudice the successful resolution applicant (SRA) and create uncertainty. The Adjudicating Authority lacks power to modify an approved plan unilaterally and can only suggest modifications to the Committee of Creditors (CoC). As the respondent did not challenge the plan within the prescribed time, it attained finality. The SRA made payments per the approved plan, and no non-compliance was attributed to it. Thus, the Adjudicating Authority exceeded jurisdiction by reviving and directing payment of the respondent's gratuity claims, and the NCLAT set aside those orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.