Company Law : The article examines the Hamlin Trust ruling, where the NCLAT held that CFO appointments must satisfy Section 203 eligibility requ...
Corporate Law : Explains how recent tribunal decisions shaped the rules for selling corporate debtors as going concerns, highlighting compliance...
Corporate Law : The Tripartite Agreement Trap: When Banks Lose Financial Creditor Status in Real Estate Insolvency This case memo discussed the ru...
Corporate Law : NCLAT holds that time spent in pending Debt Recovery Tribunal proceedings cannot be excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Ac...
Corporate Law : RTI inquiry into NCLT/NCLAT reveals member vacancies, lack of consolidated case data, and opaque appointments, highlighting need f...
Corporate Law : The Supreme Court upheld joint insolvency proceedings against two interconnected real estate companies due to common management an...
Corporate Law : From 2022-23 to 2024-25, appeals filed at NCLAT rose steadily, with IBC cases forming the majority, reflecting active engagement i...
Corporate Law : Supreme Court ruled that CoC and RP can surrender financially burdensome assets voluntarily, clarifying moratorium under section 1...
Corporate Law : SC clarifies limits of High Court's writ powers in IBC cases and recognises Indian CIRP as foreign main proceeding in cross-border...
Corporate Law : NCLT & NCLAT eligibility criteria, insolvency rules, and case statistics from 2022-2024. Updates on financial irregularities and r...
Corporate Law : NCLAT held that invoice discounting through the TReDS platform does not convert operational debt into financial debt. The appeal w...
Corporate Law : Madras HC held that a pending NCLAT appeal did not prevent PNB from conducting a Swiss Challenge auction after the OTS proposal wa...
Company Law : The NCLAT held that CFO nominees must satisfy the eligibility requirements under Section 203 of the Companies Act. It set aside th...
Income Tax : NCLAT held that a single application covering multiple years and company officers is maintainable in the absence of any statutory ...
Corporate Law : Tribunal held that proviso to Regulation 7A allows insolvency professionals to continue assignments already underway even after th...
Corporate Law : IBBI orders disciplinary action against Mr. S Vasudevan for alleged violations in the insolvency process of Mega Foods Products Ma...
Corporate Law : IBBI suspends IP for Failure to act during CIRP despite NCLAT directive and for Delay in convening Committee of Creditors (CoC) me...
Corporate Law : Read about the IBBI's disciplinary action against Mr. Venkata Sivakumar, an Interim Resolution Professional, for sharing asset mem...
Corporate Law : Govt issued a circular detailing vacancies for Judicial & Technical Members posts in NCLAT with detailed guide to apply for these...
Fema / RBI : It is clarified that cases admitted with National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)/National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) unde...
NCLAT Delhi held that after initiation of moratorium under section 14(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [IBC], no assessment proceedings can be continued by EPFO. Accordingly, appeal dismissed.
Assessee-company had challenged an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal ( NCLT ) which dismissed its Section 9 application under the IBC, against the corporate debtor for being time-barred
NCLAT Chennai held that fees is payable to Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) from the date he took charge of IRP till the date of appointment of new Resolution Professional. Accordingly, directed to pay additional fees from 53 days.
NCLT Kolkata held that a secured creditor having possession over the assets of the corporate debtor does not lose its rights to file an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.
The bills so assigned to the Financial Creditors and the amounts against such bills was disbursed. In the process of transactions, the Applicants stated to have paid a sum of Rs. 2,34,17,965/- on various dates.
On 21.04.2017, a Share Purchase Agreement was executed, wherein the erstwhile Directors sold their equity in favour of Accord Mediplus Pvt. Ltd. Respondent Nos.6 to 12 also resigned from the Trust on 01.09.2017.
According to the appellant, Respondent Nos. 1 through 26 were creditors in the class of the Project Spaze Arrow, and in order to start a CIRP against the CD, they filed an application under Section 7 that only pertained to the Project Spaze Arrow.
NCLAT Delhi held that a Decree Holder falls within the purview of the Financial Creditor under the Code, if the decree is based on a financial debt. Accordingly, dismissal of petition u/s. 7 of IBC not justified.
NCLAT Delhi held that admitting application under section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiation of CIRP for default in not completing project and handing over units within time justified.
NCLAT Delhi held that imposition of 5% penalty on average turnover/ receipt related to EWS by Competition Commission of India [CCI] under section 27 of the Competition Act, 2002 cannot be termed as unreasonable or excessive.
