Corporate Law : The Supreme Court held that liabilities arising from corporate guarantees qualify as financial debt under Section 5(8) of the Inso...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court ruled that a shortfall payment clause in a Deed of Hypothecation can qualify as a contract of guarantee under th...
Corporate Law : The article examines how conflicting Supreme Court judgments in Rainbow Papers and Raman Ispat created uncertainty regarding the s...
Corporate Law : The IBC (Amendment) Act, 2026 introduces CIIRP as a faster and proactive insolvency mechanism for early-stage financial stress. Th...
Corporate Law : Explains how the Court held that insolvency proceedings cannot be used as a pressure tactic for debt recovery. Even if default is ...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
Corporate Law : 2026 Guidelines streamline selection of Insolvency Professionals for IRP, RP, Liquidator, and Bankruptcy Trustee roles, ensuring t...
Corporate Law : The amendments replace the consultation committee with CoC oversight, giving creditors greater control over liquidation decisions....
Corporate Law : The proposal focuses on enabling creditors to initiate resolution while retaining debtor management under supervision. It sets out...
Corporate Law : The amendments arise from the inclusion of a unified “service provider” definition under the Code. The move expands regulatory...
Corporate Law : NCLT Indore held that dissolution under Section 54 of the IBC was justified after all assets of the corporate debtor were liquidat...
Corporate Law : NCLT Mumbai held that ongoing One-Time Settlement discussions cannot defeat insolvency proceedings when debt and default are admit...
Corporate Law : NCLAT held that foreign oil and gas assets owned through Videocon subsidiaries could not be included in the CIRP of Videocon Indus...
Corporate Law : Tribunal noted that the CIRP period, including all extensions, had reached 741 days and expired on 20 November 2025. Since no plan...
Corporate Law : The NCLT Mumbai held that liquidation became mandatory under Section 33(2) of the IBC after the Committee of Creditors rejected al...
Corporate Law : The amendment bars related parties, recent auditors, and connected persons from acting as registered valuers in pre-pack insolvenc...
Corporate Law : The IBBI amended the Liquidation Process Regulations, 2016 to allow appointment of one registered valuer for each asset class in M...
Corporate Law : The IBBI amended the CIRP Regulations, 2016 to permit appointment of one set of registered valuers for MSME corporate debtors. The...
Corporate Law : The IBBI Amendment Regulations, 2026 introduce nominee directors on IPA governing boards and strengthen oversight mechanisms. The ...
Corporate Law : The order highlights that delayed applications, late progress reports, and non-compliance with filing requirements amounted to ser...
The issue highlights limitations of India’s current insolvency framework relying on bilateral agreements. The key takeaway is that adopting UNCITRAL ensures coordinated and efficient cross-border insolvency resolution.
A statutory tax charge d noidt constitute a secured interest under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) therefore, the Court directed the removal of the TNVAT Department’s attachment over the corporate debtor’s property.
IBBI has extended the last date for stakeholder comments on key insolvency discussion papers. The move allows more time for feedback while keeping submission conditions unchanged.
The issue was whether delayed charges without supporting records could qualify as operational debt. The Tribunal ruled that absence of invoices and ledger entries made the claim unascertained and disputed.
Supreme Court affirmed that insolvency proceedings under IBC do not bar prosecution under Section 138 of NI Act. It held that criminal liability of directors continues independently. Ruling clarifies that both laws operate in separate spheres.
The case concerned an appeal against rejection of an insolvency petition involving alleged unpaid operational dues. The tribunal found that most invoices belonged to a separate proprietorship and not the corporate debtor. It held that the statutory threshold under Section 4 of the IBC was not met, leading to dismissal.
Observations regarding inconsistencies and possible backdating of documents led the Court to closely examine the claim. The case reflects interplay between arbitration findings and insolvency proceedings.
The issue was whether an insolvency professional fulfilled due diligence obligations under Section 29A. The Committee held that failure to verify and disclose disqualification of a wilful defaulter invalidated the process. It emphasized that eligibility must be continuously assessed and cannot be ignored at later stages.
The Authority held that information accessible on official websites need not be reproduced under RTI. The appeal was disposed of as the response had already been provided, though delayed.
The authority held that confusion arising from interim orders did not absolve the professional from taking proactive steps. The case reinforces the expectation of due diligence in insolvency proceedings.
