https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87109 The HC found that while the IBBI followed procedural requirements, the Disciplinary Committee based its conclusions on erroneous figures that contradicted the Investigating Authority's Report, which had vindicated the appellant's position. This discrepancy likely influenced the severity of the penalty imposed. The court noted that while judicial review typically focuses on decision-making processes rather than outcomes, and courts rarely interfere with penalties unless they "shock the conscience," this case warranted intervention due to factual errors. Rather than remitting the matter back to the DC, which would cause further delay, the HC reduced the appellant's two-year suspension from IRP assignments to the period already served (approximately 16 months), ending the suspension effective immediately. en-us Fri, 04 Apr 2025 07:15:55 +0530 Fri, 04 Apr 2025 07:15:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87109 The HC found that while the IBBI followed procedural requirements, the Disciplinary Committee based its conclusions on erroneous figures that contradicted the Investigating Authority's Report, which had vindicated the appellant's position. This discrepancy likely influenced the severity of the penalty imposed. The court noted that while judicial review typically focuses on decision-making processes rather than outcomes, and courts rarely interfere with penalties unless they "shock the conscience," this case warranted intervention due to factual errors. Rather than remitting the matter back to the DC, which would cause further delay, the HC reduced the appellant's two-year suspension from IRP assignments to the period already served (approximately 16 months), ending the suspension effective immediately. Highlights IBC Fri, 04 Apr 2025 07:15:55 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87109