Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
The Tribunal dismissed the application filed by companies holding units in the Corporate Debtor's project, seeking to intervene and proposing a scheme of compromise and arrangement u/s 230 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal held that there are no provisions in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for intervention by a third party at the pre-admission stage. The Tribunal's role is limited to ascertaining the existence of financial debt and its default on an application filed u/s 7 of the IBC. The Financial Creditors had already opposed the issuance of notice in the Intervention Petitions and pressed for dismissal, arguing that the IBC does not allow intervention at the pre-admission stage. The Tribunal concluded that entertaining the application would severely impact and prejudice the rights of the individual allottees who filed the main company petition, leading to unnecessary delay in the proceedings.
The Tribunal dismissed the application filed by companies holding units in the Corporate Debtor's project, seeking to intervene and proposing a scheme of compromise and arrangement u/s 230 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal held that there are no provisions in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) for intervention by a third party at the pre-admission stage. The Tribunal's role is limited to ascertaining the existence of financial debt and its default on an application filed u/s 7 of the IBC. The Financial Creditors had already opposed the issuance of notice in the Intervention Petitions and pressed for dismissal, arguing that the IBC does not allow intervention at the pre-admission stage. The Tribunal concluded that entertaining the application would severely impact and prejudice the rights of the individual allottees who filed the main company petition, leading to unnecessary delay in the proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.