Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT rejected contempt proceedings against resolution professional (RP) for filing Section 12A withdrawal application. The Tribunal determined that RP's application for CIRP withdrawal, approved by 98% Committee of Creditors (CoC) vote share, did not constitute willful disobedience of prior tribunal order. The RP was statutorily obligated to file withdrawal application, and since CoC did not approve fee payments to former or current RP, no contempt could be established. The tribunal found no merit in the contempt application, emphasizing that statutory compliance cannot be construed as contumacious conduct, thereby dismissing the application and protecting the RP's procedural actions under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
NCLAT rejected contempt proceedings against resolution professional (RP) for filing Section 12A withdrawal application. The Tribunal determined that RP's application for CIRP withdrawal, approved by 98% Committee of Creditors (CoC) vote share, did not constitute willful disobedience of prior tribunal order. The RP was statutorily obligated to file withdrawal application, and since CoC did not approve fee payments to former or current RP, no contempt could be established. The tribunal found no merit in the contempt application, emphasizing that statutory compliance cannot be construed as contumacious conduct, thereby dismissing the application and protecting the RP's procedural actions under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.