National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) recently upheld the compounding fees of Rs. 5000 per day in the case of Registrar of Companies vs. Karan Kishore Samtani.
NCLAT Delhi held that the Successful Auction Purchaser is entitled to receive certain reliefs and concessions to run the Corporate Debtor as going concern.
NCLAT Delhi held that RERA (Real Estate Regulatory Authority) being an aggrieved person under section 61 of I&B Code 2016 has a locus to file an Appeal against order initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
NCLAT Delhi held that financial assistance given by the Appellant in a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) by way of an Inter-Corporate Deposit (ICD) does not fall within the canvas of financial debt as defined u/s. 5(8) of the IBC. Hence, CIRP application u/s 7 not entertained.
Explore the NCLAT Delhi judgment on Income Tax Department’s dispute over Rs.26,06,41,424 allocation in Resolution Plan. Analysis, implications, and key insights revealed.
Read full text of NCLAT Chennai order in case of Malavika Hegde vs. IndusInd Bank, where a settlement led to termination of CIRP proceedings.
NCLAT Chennai held that any kind of settlement is between the Parties and no settlement can be directed by way of an Order under the Provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC, 2016).
Detailed analysis of NCLAT Chennai’s ruling in K Parthiban Rasu Vs Umiya Development Centre India Pvt. Ltd. & SBI case. Learn how it impacts insolvency law.
NCLAT Delhi requested the Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Govt of India to get detailed enquiry/ investigation by an appropriate authority/agency as in number of court proceedings the parties are coming with fabricated document.
NCLAT Delhi held that the First Schedule of IBBI (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016 provides that the Resolution Professional is expected to charge his fees in a transparent manner which should be a reasonable reflection of the works undertaken rather than maximizing their own personal benefits.
