Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The NCLAT upheld the order of NCLAT dismissing an application for resolution as the Corporate Debtor's name was struck off by the RoC. The application under Section 9 was questioned whether it was for winding up or CIRP initiation. The Tribunal clarified that winding up involves company dissolution and asset liquidation for creditor payment, while CIRP aims at company revival. The Code is not a debt recovery mechanism but a revival tool. CIRP safeguards the Corporate Debtor's interests and aims at maximizing asset value. Section 252(3) provides appeal rights for challenging RoC orders. The Appellate Tribunal found no errors in the Adjudicating Authority's order and dismissed the appeal.
The NCLAT upheld the order of NCLAT dismissing an application for resolution as the Corporate Debtor's name was struck off by the RoC. The application under Section 9 was questioned whether it was for winding up or CIRP initiation. The Tribunal clarified that winding up involves company dissolution and asset liquidation for creditor payment, while CIRP aims at company revival. The Code is not a debt recovery mechanism but a revival tool. CIRP safeguards the Corporate Debtor's interests and aims at maximizing asset value. Section 252(3) provides appeal rights for challenging RoC orders. The Appellate Tribunal found no errors in the Adjudicating Authority's order and dismissed the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
