Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
RPA (Remote Pilot Aircraft) for military use defined to include drones/UAV/UAS; exemptions limited to specified defence imports with Joint Secretary c...
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.