https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784076 The dominant issue was whether the order rejecting a resolution plan placed under s.30(6) IBC (including doubts on s.29A eligibility and adverse observations suggesting impropriety) should stand. The NCLAT accepted a memorandum of settlement enhancing distributions to secured and unsecured financial creditors and providing for payment of CIRP costs up to the date of plan approval; on that basis, stakeholders unanimously sought approval of the plan. Since the auditors' report did not record fraudulent or avoidance transactions, the NCLAT held the impugned adverse observations against the resolution applicant were unduly excessive and directed that they be expunged. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, the impugned orders were quashed, and the resolution plan was approved as per the settlement terms. en-us Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 29 Dec 2025 08:56:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784076 The dominant issue was whether the order rejecting a resolution plan placed under s.30(6) IBC (including doubts on s.29A eligibility and adverse observations suggesting impropriety) should stand. The NCLAT accepted a memorandum of settlement enhancing distributions to secured and unsecured financial creditors and providing for payment of CIRP costs up to the date of plan approval; on that basis, stakeholders unanimously sought approval of the plan. Since the auditors' report did not record fraudulent or avoidance transactions, the NCLAT held the impugned adverse observations against the resolution applicant were unduly excessive and directed that they be expunged. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, the impugned orders were quashed, and the resolution plan was approved as per the settlement terms. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 28 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784076