Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
581 to 600 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT held that the 10-day period under Section 99(1) for resolution professional (RP) to submit report is directory, not mandatory. The legislative scheme allows RPs to seek additional information and submit supplementary reports. In this case, the RP's initial and amended reports were properly submitted and considered by the adjudicating authority. The court found no undue delay or prejudice warranting rejection of reports. The Section 95(1) application by financial creditor was correctly admitted. Appellant's arguments challenging report timelines were rejected, and the appeal was dismissed without substantive merit.
NCLAT held that the 10-day period under Section 99(1) for resolution professional (RP) to submit report is directory, not mandatory. The legislative scheme allows RPs to seek additional information and submit supplementary reports. In this case, the RP's initial and amended reports were properly submitted and considered by the adjudicating authority. The court found no undue delay or prejudice warranting rejection of reports. The Section 95(1) application by financial creditor was correctly admitted. Appellant's arguments challenging report timelines were rejected, and the appeal was dismissed without substantive merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.