Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.