Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
