Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Insolvency and BankruptcyAugust 7, 2024Case LawsHC
Seeking to quash the demand notice for arrears of unpaid electricity charges, the court examined the scope of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and the potential for misuse. It held that operational creditors have a right to property under Article 300A of the Constitution, which is a facet of the right to life under Article 21. The Adjudicating Authority is a neutral tribunal to secure the rights of operational creditors against unfair treatment by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). While the Adjudicating Authority cannot substitute its sense of fairness for the CoC's commercial wisdom, it has a revisional jurisdiction to ascertain the correctness of the CoC's actions. The court discussed the finality of the resolution plan, the applicability of the doctrine of Constructive Res Judicata (CST), and the potential for fraud and manipulation in the IBC process. It emphasized the need to protect the interests of operational creditors and questioned the intent of bending backwards to protect one corporate debtor at the risk of exposing public interest to peril.
Seeking to quash the demand notice for arrears of unpaid electricity charges, the court examined the scope of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and the potential for misuse. It held that operational creditors have a right to property under Article 300A of the Constitution, which is a facet of the right to life under Article 21. The Adjudicating Authority is a neutral tribunal to secure the rights of operational creditors against unfair treatment by the Committee of Creditors (CoC). While the Adjudicating Authority cannot substitute its sense of fairness for the CoC's commercial wisdom, it has a revisional jurisdiction to ascertain the correctness of the CoC's actions. The court discussed the finality of the resolution plan, the applicability of the doctrine of Constructive Res Judicata (CST), and the potential for fraud and manipulation in the IBC process. It emphasized the need to protect the interests of operational creditors and questioned the intent of bending backwards to protect one corporate debtor at the risk of exposing public interest to peril.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
