Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's finding that the Resolution Plan submitted by the appellant, approved by the CoC with an 80.13% vote share, did not violate Section 30(2) of the IBC. However, the Adjudicating Authority identified non-compliance with the CIRP Regulations, 2016 by the Resolution Professional and issued remedial directions, including a fresh valuation. The Tribunal modified interim orders to permit the Resolution Professional to conduct transaction audits and valuations. The appellant, as a successful resolution applicant, remains entitled to submit a resolution plan upon the CoC's issuance of a fresh Request for Resolution Plan. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, affirming the appellant's right to participate in the CIRP process while ensuring regulatory compliance through remedial measures.
The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's finding that the Resolution Plan submitted by the appellant, approved by the CoC with an 80.13% vote share, did not violate Section 30(2) of the IBC. However, the Adjudicating Authority identified non-compliance with the CIRP Regulations, 2016 by the Resolution Professional and issued remedial directions, including a fresh valuation. The Tribunal modified interim orders to permit the Resolution Professional to conduct transaction audits and valuations. The appellant, as a successful resolution applicant, remains entitled to submit a resolution plan upon the CoC's issuance of a fresh Request for Resolution Plan. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, affirming the appellant's right to participate in the CIRP process while ensuring regulatory compliance through remedial measures.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.