Company Law : Bombay High Court held that writ petition cannot be entertained in the face of availability of alternative remedy of approaching t...
Company Law : Liquidator, in discharge of duties under Section 35, was entitled to take custody and control of the assets of the Corporate Debto...
Company Law : NCLAT Delhi held that demand notice under section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act is a valid notice of invocation of personal guarantee ...
Company Law : NCLAT Delhi held that termination of contract not triggered by the insolvency of Corporate Debtor and therefore not barred by mora...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that securitisation trusts, cannot be assessed as an AOP, are revocable within the meaning of section 63 of the I...
NCLAT Delhi held that balance sheet entries are reliable evidence of existence of financial debt. Accordingly, since debt and default against Corporate Debtor established, admission of application u/s. 7 of IBC justified.
NCLAT Delhi upholds order of Adjudicating Authority directing contribution to the assets of corporate debtor since it is clearly established that business of corporate debtor was carried on with intent to defraud creditors of corporate debtor.
NCLAT Delhi held that shareholders have locus standi to file appeal under section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code and hence the appeal is maintainable. Further, appellant has made out case of fraudulent initiation of CIRP since both Financial Creditor and Corporate Debtor are related parties.
NCLAT Delhi held that resignation from directorship of Corporate Debtor not a sufficient ground leading to revocation of his personal guarantee. Accordingly, application u/s. 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code rightly admitted for failure of repayment in respect of their guarantee obligation.
NCLAT Delhi held that acknowledgment of liability by Corporate Debtor in its balance sheets constitutes valid acknowledgement for both borrower and guarantor. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed.
Orissa High Court held that filing of writ petition challenging adjudication order under section 73 of the GST Act after inordinate delay of around one year with adequate reasoning for inordinate delay cannot be entertained. Accordingly, writ petition is dismissed.
The tribunal held that the resolution plan was invalid because several valuable properties were omitted from the Information Memorandum. The ruling emphasises that all assets must be valued and disclosed, and security interests cannot be extinguished without legal basis.
Tripura High Court held that an order accepting bond under section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC]from the accused doesn’t amount to a grant of bail. Accordingly, the present bail application is disposed of.
NCLAT Delhi held that direction to resolution professional to release the amount to Gujarat State Tax Department treating it as secured creditor under Section 48 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 is justifiable as NCLT is obliged to apply decision of Supreme Court.
NCLAT Delhi held that present appeal is not maintainable as shareholder is not a person aggrieved under section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Accordingly, order admitting CIRP u/s. 7 sustained.
