Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
