Penalty under section 271(1)(c) deleted where income was disclosed in section 153A returns and remaining additions were only estimated or computationa...
NCLAT held that Regulation 39(1B)(b) does not bar consideration of a resolution plan merely because an additional member is inducted into an already shortlisted consortium, since a consortium is not treated as a new "person" under Section 3(23). The tribunal found no evidence that the plan was belated or that the inducted member was ineligible under Section 29A, and noted that the induction could improve the consortium's financial viability and value for the corporate debtor. As evaluation and negotiation of resolution plans lie within the CoC's commercial wisdom, and no statutory prohibition was shown, the challenge to the plan's consideration was rejected and the order upheld.
NCLAT held that Regulation 39(1B)(b) does not bar consideration of a resolution plan merely because an additional member is inducted into an already shortlisted consortium, since a consortium is not treated as a new "person" under Section 3(23). The tribunal found no evidence that the plan was belated or that the inducted member was ineligible under Section 29A, and noted that the induction could improve the consortium's financial viability and value for the corporate debtor. As evaluation and negotiation of resolution plans lie within the CoC's commercial wisdom, and no statutory prohibition was shown, the challenge to the plan's consideration was rejected and the order upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
