Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
641 to 660 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A resolution plan was rejected because material non-compliances in the CIRP, including inadequate disclosure of avoidance/PUFE transactions, non-transparent handling of those proceedings, and lapses in performance security, undermined the fairness of the process. The Appellate Tribunal held that the Committee of Creditors' commercial wisdom could not cure defects where other applicants were deprived of material information and the plan proceeded on incomplete disclosure. It also upheld adverse findings against the erstwhile resolution professional, noting unsatisfactory explanations for failures in dealing with avoidance applications and security compliance. Both appeals were dismissed, and the direction to investigate the resolution professional's conduct was maintained.
A resolution plan was rejected because material non-compliances in the CIRP, including inadequate disclosure of avoidance/PUFE transactions, non-transparent handling of those proceedings, and lapses in performance security, undermined the fairness of the process. The Appellate Tribunal held that the Committee of Creditors' commercial wisdom could not cure defects where other applicants were deprived of material information and the plan proceeded on incomplete disclosure. It also upheld adverse findings against the erstwhile resolution professional, noting unsatisfactory explanations for failures in dealing with avoidance applications and security compliance. Both appeals were dismissed, and the direction to investigate the resolution professional's conduct was maintained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.