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...
A consortium under a resolution process could not be reconstituted after the original resolution plan had already been approved by the CoC. The Tribunal held that the RFRP clause permitting a change in consortium applied only before plan approval, because eligibility, financial strength, feasibility and viability had already been assessed on the original consortium and its consortium agreement. Induction of a new member with a substantial shareholding after approval created a reconstituted applicant outside the final list of prospective resolution applicants, contrary to the RFRP and the CIRP framework. The plea based on CoC commercial wisdom was rejected, as judicial deference does not extend to plans that fail statutory and process compliance. The remand for reconsideration was upheld.
A consortium under a resolution process could not be reconstituted after the original resolution plan had already been approved by the CoC. The Tribunal held that the RFRP clause permitting a change in consortium applied only before plan approval, because eligibility, financial strength, feasibility and viability had already been assessed on the original consortium and its consortium agreement. Induction of a new member with a substantial shareholding after approval created a reconstituted applicant outside the final list of prospective resolution applicants, contrary to the RFRP and the CIRP framework. The plea based on CoC commercial wisdom was rejected, as judicial deference does not extend to plans that fail statutory and process compliance. The remand for reconsideration was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.