Charitable registration turns on predominant purpose and genuine activities, while incidental fees and related-party rent require supporting adverse m...
MAT book-profit adjustments exclude disallowances for exempt-income expenditure and demerger expenditure unless expressly listed under the statutory c...
Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
Page of 4800
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 96000 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NCLAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the NCLT's order approving the resolution plan for the corporate debtor. It held that, although the appellant's expenditure on the corporate debtor had been acknowledged in prior proceedings, the appellant failed to substantiate its claim as financial or operational debt under the IBC, particularly given the delayed filing, absence of supporting documents, and an exorbitant, contractually unsupported interest component. NCLAT found no contravention of s.30(2)(b) IBC or the CIRP Regulations and reiterated the primacy of the CoC's commercial wisdom, especially where the plan had been approved with 100% voting share. As the resolution plan complied with all mandatory statutory requirements and no material irregularity was established, judicial interference was held to be unwarranted. The successful resolution applicant was permitted to proceed in terms of the approved plan, and the appeal was disposed of.
NCLAT dismissed the appeal and affirmed the NCLT's order approving the resolution plan for the corporate debtor. It held that, although the appellant's expenditure on the corporate debtor had been acknowledged in prior proceedings, the appellant failed to substantiate its claim as financial or operational debt under the IBC, particularly given the delayed filing, absence of supporting documents, and an exorbitant, contractually unsupported interest component. NCLAT found no contravention of s.30(2)(b) IBC or the CIRP Regulations and reiterated the primacy of the CoC's commercial wisdom, especially where the plan had been approved with 100% voting share. As the resolution plan complied with all mandatory statutory requirements and no material irregularity was established, judicial interference was held to be unwarranted. The successful resolution applicant was permitted to proceed in terms of the approved plan, and the appeal was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.