Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
