Cash routed to non-existent firm deemed proceeds of crime; laundered funds and properties attachable, provisional attachments confirmed; two accounts ...
Continuation of Section 73 service-tax proceedings after provider's death (construing s.65(7)) - held to abate; posthumous OIO and recoveries invalida...
The text addresses whether the adjudicatory authority may extend the Personal Insolvency Resolution Process (PIRP) beyond procedural timeline lapses while the statutory moratorium remains time-capped. It reasons that procedural timelines in the applicable regulation (including the 120 day filing requirement) are directory, not automatically fatal, and that the authority retains jurisdiction to permit extensions where stakeholders authorise and sufficient reasons exist; however the moratorium itself cannot be extended beyond its statutory outer limit. The conclusion reversed the rejection of extension applications and permitted adjudication of the repayment plan on the extended PIRP timeline.
The text addresses whether the adjudicatory authority may extend the Personal Insolvency Resolution Process (PIRP) beyond procedural timeline lapses while the statutory moratorium remains time-capped. It reasons that procedural timelines in the applicable regulation (including the 120 day filing requirement) are directory, not automatically fatal, and that the authority retains jurisdiction to permit extensions where stakeholders authorise and sufficient reasons exist; however the moratorium itself cannot be extended beyond its statutory outer limit. The conclusion reversed the rejection of extension applications and permitted adjudication of the repayment plan on the extended PIRP timeline.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.