Jurisdictional validity: notice issued by a non jurisdictional officer invalidates reassessment where no formal transfer or independent verification o...
Page of 4823
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5861 to 5880 of 96456 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The dominant issue was maintainability of the appeal under s.61(2) of the IBC. The tribunal held that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period and, in the absence of any application or sufficient cause for delay, it could not be entertained, resulting in dismissal as time-barred. On the attempted challenge to differential distribution between assenting and dissenting/abstaining secured financial creditors, the tribunal found the plea of "discrimination" was in substance a belated, indirect challenge to an already-approved resolution plan, which had attained finality and could not be reopened or modified after implementation, resulting in denial of any relief. - NCLAT
The dominant issue was maintainability of the appeal under s.61(2) of the IBC. The tribunal held that the appeal was filed beyond the prescribed period and, in the absence of any application or sufficient cause for delay, it could not be entertained, resulting in dismissal as time-barred. On the attempted challenge to differential distribution between assenting and dissenting/abstaining secured financial creditors, the tribunal found the plea of "discrimination" was in substance a belated, indirect challenge to an already-approved resolution plan, which had attained finality and could not be reopened or modified after implementation, resulting in denial of any relief. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.