Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
NCLAT examined allegations of collusion between CoC, RP and an entrant in condoning delay in submission of EoI and alleged concealment from other PRAs, claimed as material irregularity under the CIRP Regulations. NCLAT held that not every procedural breach under the Regulations constitutes "material irregularity"; the test is whether the deviation results in an outcome that is plainly illegal or so unfair as to undermine the integrity of the CIRP. Treating the Regulations as facilitative, the Tribunal found that the alleged violations, even if assumed, did not attain the threshold of material irregularity warranting invalidation of the resolution process. Accordingly, NCLAT set aside the order of the Adjudicating Authority and allowed the appeal, upholding the challenged resolution approval.
NCLAT examined allegations of collusion between CoC, RP and an entrant in condoning delay in submission of EoI and alleged concealment from other PRAs, claimed as material irregularity under the CIRP Regulations. NCLAT held that not every procedural breach under the Regulations constitutes "material irregularity"; the test is whether the deviation results in an outcome that is plainly illegal or so unfair as to undermine the integrity of the CIRP. Treating the Regulations as facilitative, the Tribunal found that the alleged violations, even if assumed, did not attain the threshold of material irregularity warranting invalidation of the resolution process. Accordingly, NCLAT set aside the order of the Adjudicating Authority and allowed the appeal, upholding the challenged resolution approval.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.