Reopening assessments beyond four years requires nondisclosure of material facts; mere change of opinion or general allegations invalidates reassessme...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6001 to 6020 of 96207 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A promoter's restructuring proposal was treated as not being a resolution plan under the I&B Code because it was not submitted in accordance with the CIRP framework, including the expression of interest process and the requirements of Section 30(2). The Appellate Tribunal held that such a proposal could, at best, be considered a Section 12A withdrawal request to financial creditors, not a compliant resolution plan. As no valid plan had been approved, liquidation followed under Section 33(1)(b). The Tribunal also noted that the corporate debtor had already been sold in liquidation and a sale certificate issued, making the appeal infructuous and leaving no effective relief available.
A promoter's restructuring proposal was treated as not being a resolution plan under the I&B Code because it was not submitted in accordance with the CIRP framework, including the expression of interest process and the requirements of Section 30(2). The Appellate Tribunal held that such a proposal could, at best, be considered a Section 12A withdrawal request to financial creditors, not a compliant resolution plan. As no valid plan had been approved, liquidation followed under Section 33(1)(b). The Tribunal also noted that the corporate debtor had already been sold in liquidation and a sale certificate issued, making the appeal infructuous and leaving no effective relief available.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.