https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751255 The restructuring framework required liquidation value to be aligned with the fixed cut-off date for the resolution process, and the plan, once approved by the requisite lender majority, bound all lenders. Because liquidation value had already been computed and communicated, and the earlier order had fixed 15.10.2018 as the relevant cut-off date, the value determined on 30.09.2018 was treated as consistent with the governing process. The request for recomputation on a later date had no basis in the applicable framework, so the challenge to the date and basis of liquidation value computation was rejected and the adopted valuation was upheld. en-us Thu, 04 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Apr 2024 15:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751255 The restructuring framework required liquidation value to be aligned with the fixed cut-off date for the resolution process, and the plan, once approved by the requisite lender majority, bound all lenders. Because liquidation value had already been computed and communicated, and the earlier order had fixed 15.10.2018 as the relevant cut-off date, the value determined on 30.09.2018 was treated as consistent with the governing process. The request for recomputation on a later date had no basis in the applicable framework, so the challenge to the date and basis of liquidation value computation was rejected and the adopted valuation was upheld. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 04 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751255