https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447641 The NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority committed patent errors in determining whether the appellant was a related party under Section 5(24) of the Code. The Authority incorrectly held that related parties have voting rights in Committee of Creditors meetings and failed to consider detailed evidence including MCA data and director charts provided by the appellant. The Authority also erroneously stated no material was produced except general observations, despite substantial documentation being on record. The NCLAT allowed the appeal by remand, directing the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh after considering all evidence and recording specific findings in a speaking order. en-us Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jan 2024 09:11:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447641 The NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority committed patent errors in determining whether the appellant was a related party under Section 5(24) of the Code. The Authority incorrectly held that related parties have voting rights in Committee of Creditors meetings and failed to consider detailed evidence including MCA data and director charts provided by the appellant. The Authority also erroneously stated no material was produced except general observations, despite substantial documentation being on record. The NCLAT allowed the appeal by remand, directing the Adjudicating Authority to decide afresh after considering all evidence and recording specific findings in a speaking order. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 04 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447641