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...
Unraveling the NCLAT Chennai verdict in the GVK Energy Vs Axis Bank case, underscoring the supremacy of IBC over RBI’s directions in loan agreements.
In present facts of the case, it was observed that deposit of 10% of the penalty shall have no effect on the order of ‘debarment’ passed against the Appellant(s) under Section 132(4)(c). Order of ‘debarment’ shall continue to operate unless an order is passed by the Appellate Tribunal.
The Supreme Court of India has scheduled the final disposal of the appeal filed by Google on October 10, 2023. This appeal challenges the penalty imposed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) on Google for abusing its dominant position in the Android OS app store market. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) had upheld the CCI’s decision to impose a penalty of Rs. 1337.76 Crores on Google.
NCLAT Delhi held that struck off of name from the list of Active Companies by ROC unsustainable as Company is having substantial movable as well as immovable assets, and hence it cannot be said that the Appellant Company is not carrying on any business or operations.
Read the full text of the NCLAT Chennai order in the case of K. Narayanasamy vs J. Karthiga. The NCLAT set aside the order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) that dismissed an application filed by the suspended director. The NCLAT remanded the matter back to the NCLT for fresh adjudication on merits, allowing the suspended director an opportunity to be heard.
NCLAT Chennai held that if there is any breach of the Terms of Settlement, it cannot be construed as an issue which would fall within the ambit of the definition of Oppression and Mismanagement as defined under the Companies Act, 1956.
NCLAT Chennai held that subsequent to the approval of the Resolution Plan of the CoC and before the approval by the Adjudicating Authority, no modifications / alterations can be called for as IBC is a time bound process.
In this case the NCLT’s order was set aside by the NCLAT to implead a former Executive Director of the Punjab National Bank in a matter related to Rs 14000 crore scam involving diamond merchant Nirav Modi Group and Gitanjali Group of Companies.
NCLAT Chennai rejected grant of condonation of delay in filing of the ‘Claim under Form-C’ as sufficient cause not shown and IBC is a time bound process.
NCLAT Chennai held that the sub-Contractor, would not have any contractual relationship with the owner and would not be entitled to prefer any `Claims’ against the owner
