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" ?
NCLAT affirmed the approval of a resolution plan where unsecured dissenting financial creditors received Rs.1.5 Crore against their admitted claim of Rs.10.94 Crore, representing 13.44% vote share. The plan secured 86.67% CoC approval within the 330-day CIRP period. The Tribunal held that the payout complied with Section 30(2)(b) of IBC, rejecting appellant's contention regarding homebuyers receiving units without haircuts. The fact that Adjudicating Authority's approval came on 14.05.2024, after the CIRP period, was deemed immaterial since the plan was approved and filed within the statutory timeframe. The NCLAT emphasized its limited jurisdiction to interfere with resolution plans and dismissed the appeal, finding no violation of statutory requirements.
NCLAT affirmed the approval of a resolution plan where unsecured dissenting financial creditors received Rs.1.5 Crore against their admitted claim of Rs.10.94 Crore, representing 13.44% vote share. The plan secured 86.67% CoC approval within the 330-day CIRP period. The Tribunal held that the payout complied with Section 30(2)(b) of IBC, rejecting appellant's contention regarding homebuyers receiving units without haircuts. The fact that Adjudicating Authority's approval came on 14.05.2024, after the CIRP period, was deemed immaterial since the plan was approved and filed within the statutory timeframe. The NCLAT emphasized its limited jurisdiction to interfere with resolution plans and dismissed the appeal, finding no violation of statutory requirements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.