Proceeds of crime and money laundering: PMLA prosecution requires subsisting predicate offence; discharge of predicate accused precludes further prose...
Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
A resolution plan that expressly addresses insolvency resolution process (CIRP) costs makes those costs final and unassailable; however, where claimed CIRP costs were never placed before or approved by the committee of creditors as CIRP costs, those claims cannot be allowed. The tribunal examined merits and found the impugned related-party transaction approvals were for business continuity, not approvals of CIRP cost under the CIRP Regulations, so the adjudicating authority correctly rejected the application seeking payment. Consequently, the appeals challenging that rejection were dismissed for lack of merit.
A resolution plan that expressly addresses insolvency resolution process (CIRP) costs makes those costs final and unassailable; however, where claimed CIRP costs were never placed before or approved by the committee of creditors as CIRP costs, those claims cannot be allowed. The tribunal examined merits and found the impugned related-party transaction approvals were for business continuity, not approvals of CIRP cost under the CIRP Regulations, so the adjudicating authority correctly rejected the application seeking payment. Consequently, the appeals challenging that rejection were dismissed for lack of merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.