TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ 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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the impugned direction permitting the resolution professional to conduct the ongoing corporate insolvency resolution process required interference, and whether the resolution professional may place an agenda before the committee of creditors for further steps in compliance with the Supreme Court's directions.
Analysis: The operative directions of the Supreme Court required the insolvency process to be completed within the stipulated time and the matter to proceed in accordance with those directions. The impugned order was understood as enabling the resolution professional to proceed further, but the actual course of action still depended on the committee of creditors, which remains in overall control of the corporate insolvency resolution process. Since the resolution professional had proposed to place the matter before the committee of creditors and the committee was the appropriate body to decide the next steps, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the appeal pending.
Conclusion: No interference with the impugned order was warranted. The resolution professional was permitted to place the appropriate agenda before the committee of creditors, which may decide the further course for completion of the insolvency process in terms of the Supreme Court's directions.
Final Conclusion: The appeal was disposed of by leaving the parties to proceed before the committee of creditors for necessary action in the corporate insolvency resolution process.
Ratio Decidendi: In insolvency proceedings, the committee of creditors retains the primary authority to decide the further course of the corporate insolvency resolution process, and the tribunal may permit the resolution professional to seek such directions from the committee to implement binding superior-court directions.
TaxTMI 
