Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the approval of the resolution plan under Section 30(2) of the IBC, rejecting the appellant's attempt to recall the order based on belated statutory tax claims. The appellant failed to exercise due diligence in filing claims within the prescribed timeframe, and allowing such late claims would undermine the insolvency resolution process, prejudice other creditors, and jeopardize the plan's viability. The tribunal emphasized that finality in the resolution process is paramount, and reopening claims post-approval violates the statutory framework and established Supreme Court precedents prohibiting belated claims. The resolution plan, approved by the CoC with requisite majority, complied with Sections 30(2) and 53 of the IBC and relevant CIRP Regulations. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as a disguised review lacking merit, affirming the Adjudicating Authority's order and maintaining the integrity and conclusiveness of the approved resolution plan.
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the approval of the resolution plan under Section 30(2) of the IBC, rejecting the appellant's attempt to recall the order based on belated statutory tax claims. The appellant failed to exercise due diligence in filing claims within the prescribed timeframe, and allowing such late claims would undermine the insolvency resolution process, prejudice other creditors, and jeopardize the plan's viability. The tribunal emphasized that finality in the resolution process is paramount, and reopening claims post-approval violates the statutory framework and established Supreme Court precedents prohibiting belated claims. The resolution plan, approved by the CoC with requisite majority, complied with Sections 30(2) and 53 of the IBC and relevant CIRP Regulations. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as a disguised review lacking merit, affirming the Adjudicating Authority's order and maintaining the integrity and conclusiveness of the approved resolution plan.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
