Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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 4823 
Join Channel 
