Just a moment...
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the insolvency professional had contravened the regulatory requirements by accepting or undertaking the liquidation assignment without a valid authorisation for assignment after 31 December 2019.
Analysis: Regulation 7A of the Insolvency Professional Regulations prohibits acceptance or undertaking of an assignment after 31 December 2019 unless the insolvency professional holds a valid authorisation for assignment. The disciplinary authority also noted that the authorisation regime is linked with the eligibility conditions under the model bye-laws, including the age restriction for obtaining such authorisation. On the facts, the professional had given written consent for appointment as liquidator before the cut-off date and that consent had been filed with the tribunal before the new requirement became operative. In addition, the authority accepted that a person above seventy years was ineligible to apply for authorisation for assignment, which explained the absence of such authorisation in the present case. In that backdrop, no lapse was found in the professional's conduct.
Conclusion: No contravention was made out and no direction was warranted against the insolvency professional.