Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9201 to 9220 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned AA order and upheld approval of the resolution plan submitted by the Successful Resolution Applicant, holding it received the requisite approvals under Section 30(4). The Tribunal directed admission of the additional MCA email into the record, found the AA's disqualification findings under Section 29A clauses (c), (e), (g), (i) and (j) to be unsustainable, and held the SRA eligible. The Tribunal held the third-party deposit of the Performance Bank Guarantee did not contravene Regulation 36B(4A), found Regulation 38(3) inapplicable as relied upon, and concluded net-worth criteria under the RFRP were satisfied. The appeal was disposed and the AA order dated 22.07.2025 set aside.
NCLAT allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned AA order and upheld approval of the resolution plan submitted by the Successful Resolution Applicant, holding it received the requisite approvals under Section 30(4). The Tribunal directed admission of the additional MCA email into the record, found the AA's disqualification findings under Section 29A clauses (c), (e), (g), (i) and (j) to be unsustainable, and held the SRA eligible. The Tribunal held the third-party deposit of the Performance Bank Guarantee did not contravene Regulation 36B(4A), found Regulation 38(3) inapplicable as relied upon, and concluded net-worth criteria under the RFRP were satisfied. The appeal was disposed and the AA order dated 22.07.2025 set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
