We are of the considered opinion that the period of judicial intervention w.e.f 21st October, 2020 till 9th November, 2020 (the period covering the time spent in pursuing the extension application in the first instance) and 12th January, 2021 to 3rd February, 2021
Liquidator of a Company in liquidation under the Code is not required to file Income Tax Return, then there is no question of claiming refund of TDS deducted under Section 194 IA of the IT Act.
Mohit Minerals Ltd Vs. Nidhi Impotrade Pvt Ltd (NCLAT) An Advocate can issue demand notice on the instruction of his client (the operational creditor), even though not backed by the Board Resolution Brief Facts: An application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was filed by the Appellant- Operational Creditor and dismissed […]
Sri D. Srinivasa Rao Vs. Vaishnovi Infratech Ltd (NCLAT) Brief Facts: An application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against Respondent- ‘Vaishnovi Infratech Ltd.’ (Corporate Debtor) filed by the Appellant- Operational Creditor was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Hyderabad Bench, Special Bench on the ground that the […]
Aster Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs Solas Fire Safety Equipment Pvt. Ltd (NCLAT) Brief Facts: An application was filed under Section 9 of IBC and the Adjudicating Authority issued Notice but none appeared for Respondent. The Adjudicating Authority disposed of by directing the Respondent to settle the issue in question within a stipulated period while observing […]
Pratap Technocrats P Ltd & Ors Vs. Monitoring Committee of Reliance Infratel Ltd & Anr (NCLAT) Brief Facts: The version of appellants says that they were kept unaware of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process qua the Corporate Debtor, thus being wholly unaware of the progress of Resolution Process with no details provided by the Resolution […]
Jay Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Vs George Samuel (NCLAT Delhi) The Learned Counsel are not disputing that Respondent No. 2 is ‘Committee of Creditors’ having 100% voting right. The Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2 submits that if this Hon’ble Tribunal directs the Respondent No. 2 is ready to consider the revised Resolution Plan (Annexure P/6). […]
Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963 would have no application to proceedings under I&B Code. Therefore, the issue raised as regards acknowledgement of liability by reflection in the Balance Sheet/ Annual Return would be irrelevant.
Mr Rajnish Jain Vs Manoj Kumar Singh – I.R.P. (NCLAT, Delhi) Resolution Professional or Committee of Creditors cannot reclassify status of a creditor from Financial to Operational Creditor NCLAT held that during CIRP, the IRP is authorised to collate the claims, and based on that he is empowered to constitute the Committee of Creditors. We […]
Volkswagen Finance Private Ltd. Vs Shree Balaji Printopack Pvt. Ltd. (NCLAT Delhi) From the documentary evidence on record it is clear that no ‘Charge’ has been registered under the provisions of Section 77(1) of the Companies Act 2013, in relation to the Subject Property. The Liquidator has rightly referred to Regulation 21 of IBBI (Liquidation […]
