Transfer pricing comparables and adjustments: Tribunal revisits loss-maker status, segmental comparability, working capital relief, and risk allocatio...
Business expenditure disallowance failed where commission, related-party salary and promotion payments were supported by records and inquiry was inade...
Section 31 review of a resolution plan is limited to statutory compliance and procedural fairness; the Adjudicating Authority cannot reappraise CoC commercial wisdom unless the record shows opacity, incomplete disclosure or abuse of CIRP. The Tribunal found the Information Memorandum and process defective because asset values fell, liabilities disappeared, and no proper audit or meaningful disclosure explained the changes or addressed possible avoidance issues. It also recognised an implied duty on a creditor involved in parallel CIRPs to disclose material facts affecting transparency, though non-disclosure is not automatically fatal. On these facts, the plan was rightly rejected and liquidation confirmed.
Section 31 review of a resolution plan is limited to statutory compliance and procedural fairness; the Adjudicating Authority cannot reappraise CoC commercial wisdom unless the record shows opacity, incomplete disclosure or abuse of CIRP. The Tribunal found the Information Memorandum and process defective because asset values fell, liabilities disappeared, and no proper audit or meaningful disclosure explained the changes or addressed possible avoidance issues. It also recognised an implied duty on a creditor involved in parallel CIRPs to disclose material facts affecting transparency, though non-disclosure is not automatically fatal. On these facts, the plan was rightly rejected and liquidation confirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.