Consultancy fees claimed as business expense-can tax disallowance rest on survey suspicion despite invoices, contracts and bank trail? Appeal dismisse...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
