Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
The NCLAT examined a challenge to a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Tribunal held that the applicant, as an unsuccessful resolution applicant, lacks locus standi to challenge the plan, except on specific eligibility grounds. The CoC's commercial wisdom in selecting a resolution plan was deemed non-justiciable. The Tribunal found no violation of natural justice, confirmed Respondent No. 3's eligibility under Section 29A, and determined that a related party connection was not established. The revised financial bid submitted post-timeline was rejected. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the original resolution plan's approval.
The NCLAT examined a challenge to a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Tribunal held that the applicant, as an unsuccessful resolution applicant, lacks locus standi to challenge the plan, except on specific eligibility grounds. The CoC's commercial wisdom in selecting a resolution plan was deemed non-justiciable. The Tribunal found no violation of natural justice, confirmed Respondent No. 3's eligibility under Section 29A, and determined that a related party connection was not established. The revised financial bid submitted post-timeline was rejected. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the original resolution plan's approval.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
