Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT upheld the admission of Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) for the Corporate Debtor (CD), a registered MSME. While acknowledging that the Section 54C application was filed beyond the 14-day statutory period after the Section 7 application, the Tribunal determined it would not serve stakeholder interests to invalidate the completed resolution. The CD's resolution involved three consortium bank members, with SBI (47.21%), IDBI (26.70%), and Bank of Baroda (26.09%) vote shares. The Tribunal directed the Successful Resolution Applicant to pay any differential amount due to the dissenting financial creditor within 30 days, in accordance with Section 30(2)(b) of IBC. The resolution plan's implementation was maintained, prioritizing the special protection afforded to MSMEs under Chapter III-A of the IBC.
NCLAT upheld the admission of Pre-Packaged Insolvency Resolution Process (PPIRP) for the Corporate Debtor (CD), a registered MSME. While acknowledging that the Section 54C application was filed beyond the 14-day statutory period after the Section 7 application, the Tribunal determined it would not serve stakeholder interests to invalidate the completed resolution. The CD's resolution involved three consortium bank members, with SBI (47.21%), IDBI (26.70%), and Bank of Baroda (26.09%) vote shares. The Tribunal directed the Successful Resolution Applicant to pay any differential amount due to the dissenting financial creditor within 30 days, in accordance with Section 30(2)(b) of IBC. The resolution plan's implementation was maintained, prioritizing the special protection afforded to MSMEs under Chapter III-A of the IBC.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
