Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1501 to 1520 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A CoC-approved resolution plan remains binding inter se the CoC and the successful resolution applicant even before approval by the adjudicating authority, and cannot be withdrawn or modified after submission for approval. The Tribunal applied Ebix Singapore and State Bank of India v. Consortium of Murarilal Jalan to hold that the CoC had no jurisdiction to authorise the Resolution Professional to seek withdrawal of the pending plan approval application. It further held that post-submission CoC meetings under Regulation 18(2) may deal only with matters not affecting the resolution plan. The order allowing withdrawal on the RP's oral request was set aside, the approval application was revived, and the separate promoter-related application was left open.
A CoC-approved resolution plan remains binding inter se the CoC and the successful resolution applicant even before approval by the adjudicating authority, and cannot be withdrawn or modified after submission for approval. The Tribunal applied Ebix Singapore and State Bank of India v. Consortium of Murarilal Jalan to hold that the CoC had no jurisdiction to authorise the Resolution Professional to seek withdrawal of the pending plan approval application. It further held that post-submission CoC meetings under Regulation 18(2) may deal only with matters not affecting the resolution plan. The order allowing withdrawal on the RP's oral request was set aside, the approval application was revived, and the separate promoter-related application was left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.