Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
An approved resolution plan that fixes distribution to dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2)(b) read with Section 53(1) remains binding once approved under Section 31, and the creditor is entitled to the higher of the plan amount or liquidation value. The CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a liquidation-value based distribution mechanism could not be revisited by the Monitoring Committee, whose role was confined to implementation. A later attempt by the Monitoring Committee to reduce the dissenting creditor's entitlement was held to be an impermissible modification of the approved plan. The reliance on India Resurgence ARC v. Amit Metaliks was rejected because the creditor was not seeking anything beyond the CoC-approved liquidation value.
An approved resolution plan that fixes distribution to dissenting financial creditors under Section 30(2)(b) read with Section 53(1) remains binding once approved under Section 31, and the creditor is entitled to the higher of the plan amount or liquidation value. The CoC's commercial wisdom in approving a liquidation-value based distribution mechanism could not be revisited by the Monitoring Committee, whose role was confined to implementation. A later attempt by the Monitoring Committee to reduce the dissenting creditor's entitlement was held to be an impermissible modification of the approved plan. The reliance on India Resurgence ARC v. Amit Metaliks was rejected because the creditor was not seeking anything beyond the CoC-approved liquidation value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
