Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order directing a transaction audit and allowing the application for dissolution u/s 54 of the IBC and Regulation 14 of the Liquidation Regulations. The scheme of the IBC mandates that dissolution is a subsequent step after complete liquidation, which was not undertaken in this case. The CIRP was completed without a resolution plan, despite publication of Form-G twice. No liquidation order was passed u/s 33(1). Since the CoC, consisting of the sole Financial Creditor who initiated CIRP, decided not to contribute towards liquidation costs and the CIRP period ended, the RP should have intimated the Registrar of Companies for striking off the company's name instead of resorting to Section 54. The Appellate Tribunal's judgment in Shyson Thomas was distinguished as a case where the Adjudicating Authority exercised its jurisdiction to direct dissolution.
The Appellate Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order directing a transaction audit and allowing the application for dissolution u/s 54 of the IBC and Regulation 14 of the Liquidation Regulations. The scheme of the IBC mandates that dissolution is a subsequent step after complete liquidation, which was not undertaken in this case. The CIRP was completed without a resolution plan, despite publication of Form-G twice. No liquidation order was passed u/s 33(1). Since the CoC, consisting of the sole Financial Creditor who initiated CIRP, decided not to contribute towards liquidation costs and the CIRP period ended, the RP should have intimated the Registrar of Companies for striking off the company's name instead of resorting to Section 54. The Appellate Tribunal's judgment in Shyson Thomas was distinguished as a case where the Adjudicating Authority exercised its jurisdiction to direct dissolution.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
