PMLA anticipatory bail requires satisfaction of twin conditions, while predicate-offence protection does not extend to independent money-laundering pr...
School-affiliation charges remain taxable where not directly connected with examinations, while extended limitation requires proof of deliberate tax e...
Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 96510 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 and set aside the NCLT order which had directed the suspended directors of the CD (appellants) to contribute to the liquidation estate under s.66 of the IBC. NCLAT held that the impugned share purchase transactions, though loss-making, were commercial decisions within the appellants' financial intermediation business and could not, on the available material, be characterised as fraudulent or wrongful trading. The Appellate Tribunal found that the transactional audit report was not conclusive evidence and that the NCLT failed to examine whether the statutory conditions under s.66(2) were cumulatively satisfied, particularly knowledge of inevitable CIRP and lack of due diligence in minimising creditor losses. Consequently, the findings of fraudulent transactions and corresponding liability of the appellants were vacated.
NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT order which had directed the suspended directors of the CD (appellants) to contribute to the liquidation estate under s.66 of the IBC. NCLAT held that the impugned share purchase transactions, though loss-making, were commercial decisions within the appellants' financial intermediation business and could not, on the available material, be characterised as fraudulent or wrongful trading. The Appellate Tribunal found that the transactional audit report was not conclusive evidence and that the NCLT failed to examine whether the statutory conditions under s.66(2) were cumulatively satisfied, particularly knowledge of inevitable CIRP and lack of due diligence in minimising creditor losses. Consequently, the findings of fraudulent transactions and corresponding liability of the appellants were vacated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.