Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Employee conflict disclosures and investment restrictions expand with new recusal duties, post-employment limits, and compliance reporting requirement...
Section 32A of the IBC was applied to determine whether...
IBC resolution plan immunity from money-laundering: corporate debtor removed as accused; cases continue against ex-directors, attached assets refunded.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Section 32A of the IBC was applied to determine whether money-laundering proceedings could continue against a corporate debtor whose resolution plan had been approved and substantially implemented. Since the statutory immunity attaches post-resolution, the corporate debtor was directed to be deleted from the array of accused, while prosecution could continue against erstwhile directors/persons in control and other conspirators/abettors, including confiscation of their own attached assets, if any. The protection was made conditional on the successful resolution applicant being unconnected with prior management and not a beneficiary of proceeds of crime; if investigation undermines this foundation, the enforcement agency may proceed in accordance with law, including questioning the resolution plan. The enforcement agency's challenge to plan approval was closed; it was held to have no right or lien over assets forming part of the approved plan, and deposits were ordered to be refunded with interest. - SC
Section 32A of the IBC was applied to determine whether money-laundering proceedings could continue against a corporate debtor whose resolution plan had been approved and substantially implemented. Since the statutory immunity attaches post-resolution, the corporate debtor was directed to be deleted from the array of accused, while prosecution could continue against erstwhile directors/persons in control and other conspirators/abettors, including confiscation of their own attached assets, if any. The protection was made conditional on the successful resolution applicant being unconnected with prior management and not a beneficiary of proceeds of crime; if investigation undermines this foundation, the enforcement agency may proceed in accordance with law, including questioning the resolution plan. The enforcement agency's challenge to plan approval was closed; it was held to have no right or lien over assets forming part of the approved plan, and deposits were ordered to be refunded with interest. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
