https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366318 A resolution plan that complied with Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and carried the required CoC approval was found fit for approval because the Resolution Professional submitted the prescribed certificate and supporting record, and the plan included the implementation, management, and supervision framework required for approval. Objections by rejected applicants alleging irregularity in selection, disclosure of bid details, and need for investigation failed because the statutory process had been followed and the adjudicating authority would not reopen the CoC's commercial decision or the rejection of competing plans absent proved non-compliance. The plan was approved under Section 31(1), made binding on stakeholders, and the moratorium ceased. en-us Sat, 31 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Sep 2018 08:00:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366318 A resolution plan that complied with Section 30(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and carried the required CoC approval was found fit for approval because the Resolution Professional submitted the prescribed certificate and supporting record, and the plan included the implementation, management, and supervision framework required for approval. Objections by rejected applicants alleging irregularity in selection, disclosure of bid details, and need for investigation failed because the statutory process had been followed and the adjudicating authority would not reopen the CoC's commercial decision or the rejection of competing plans absent proved non-compliance. The plan was approved under Section 31(1), made binding on stakeholders, and the moratorium ceased. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Sat, 31 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366318