Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
The dominant issue was whether 20.08.2024 to 28.05.2025 should be excluded from the CIRP timeline as a period during which the process could not effectively progress due to directions of the Adjudicating Authority. The tribunal held that CoC decision-making was restrained pending claim verification, and even where voting was permitted, implementation required prior leave, materially impeding CIRP progress; further, disputes and changes regarding the resolution professional also disrupted the process. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to grant exclusion of this 281-day period, while affirming the exclusion already granted for the other period; the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was whether 20.08.2024 to 28.05.2025 should be excluded from the CIRP timeline as a period during which the process could not effectively progress due to directions of the Adjudicating Authority. The tribunal held that CoC decision-making was restrained pending claim verification, and even where voting was permitted, implementation required prior leave, materially impeding CIRP progress; further, disputes and changes regarding the resolution professional also disrupted the process. Consequently, the impugned order was modified to grant exclusion of this 281-day period, while affirming the exclusion already granted for the other period; the appeal was disposed of. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.