TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
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
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the recall application should be allowed to set aside the Tribunal's judgment dated 25.07.2025 insofar as it held the applicant to be ineligible under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; (ii) Whether proceedings of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the corporate debtor should continue from the stage of issuance of a fresh Form-G.
Issue (i): Whether the Applicant Cosmic CRF Limited is ineligible to be a resolution applicant under Section 29A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and whether the Tribunal's earlier findings to that effect should be recalled.
Analysis: The Tribunal reviewed expert reports, statutory provisions, and judicial precedents addressing the temporal test for clause (c), the scope of connected persons and persons acting in concert, and the purposive object of Section 29A. The material on record showed cross-shareholding, directorships and post-resolution asset transfers connecting the applicant and its promoters with a previously NPA entity (CFAL), retention of operational roles post-resolution, and corporate guarantees linked to entities in the same group. The Committee of Creditors had relied heavily on a senior counsel's opinion in reaching eligibility, but the Tribunal examined the underlying facts and reports, applied the see-through / de facto control approach, considered the first proviso to clause (c) and the requirement that overdue amounts must be paid to remove disqualification, and observed incomplete disclosure and unresolved factual gaps (including invocation/enforcement status of guarantees). On balance and adopting a purposive interpretation of Section 29A informed by precedent, the Tribunal found that disqualifying connections and factual indicia of continued de facto control existed such that ineligibility attached under the provisions considered.
Conclusion: The recall application insofar as it sought to set aside the Tribunal's holding that Cosmic CRF Limited was ineligible under Section 29A is dismissed; the earlier findings of ineligibility are retained.
Issue (ii): Whether the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of Amzen Transportation Industries Ltd. should be directed to continue from the stage of issuance of a fresh Form-G.
Analysis: The Tribunal noted compliance steps already undertaken by the resolution professional following the earlier order and the existence of received EOIs and pending resolution-plan related timelines. Given the dismissal of the recall on eligibility grounds and the need to progress CIRP, the Tribunal considered continuation appropriate while also directing an independent inquiry by the Insolvency regulator into related procedural and disclosure issues.
Conclusion: Proceedings of the CIRP shall continue with immediate effect and further processing, including issuance of a fresh Form G and related steps, is directed to proceed.
Final Conclusion: The recall application is dismissed; the Tribunal's earlier determination that the applicant is ineligible under Section 29A stands and the CIRP process for the corporate debtor is ordered to continue without interruption while regulatory inquiry is permitted.
Ratio Decidendi: Where material facts and documentary indicia show substantive (de facto) connections, control or continuing involvement of a resolution applicant or its connected persons with an entity whose account was classified as NPA, and the statutory gateway in Section 29A (including its proviso) is not satisfied, the resolution applicant can be held ineligible; eligibility must be assessed on substance (de facto control and acting in concert) at the plan submission date and through purposive application of Section 29A.
TaxTMI 
