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 Section 12A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 can be invoked to withdraw proceedings after an order of liquidation has been passed.
Analysis: Section 12A is framed as part of the CIRP framework under Chapter II and permits withdrawal of applications under Sections 7, 9 and 10 with the prescribed creditor approval. The statutory scheme does not extend that mechanism to Chapter III liquidation proceedings. The absence of any corresponding liquidation-stage withdrawal provision, coupled with the later insertion of Regulation 2B for compromise or arrangement under Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013, supports the conclusion that liquidation is governed by a separate and exhaustive regime. Inherent powers or broad procedural discretion cannot be used to override this express legislative structure or to create a withdrawal route where the Code does not provide one.
Conclusion: Section 12A cannot be applied at the liquidation stage, and an application seeking withdrawal after liquidation is not maintainable.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the insolvency statute expressly confines withdrawal under Section 12A to the CIRP framework and omits any equivalent mechanism in liquidation, the provision cannot be extended by interpretation or inherent powers to liquidation proceedings.