Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
Advance-ruling mechanism governs pending GST classification, exemption and taxability disputes, limiting writ review once the specialised forum functi...
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the dismissal of an application u/s 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code due to improper service of notice u/s 8. The notice was issued to Key Managerial Personnel (KMP) of the Corporate Debtor (CD) but not to the CD itself at its registered office as mandated by Rule 5(2)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. Issuing notice u/s 8 on Form 3 to the CD at its registered office is a prerequisite for filing an application u/s 9 by the Operational Creditor (OC). The Tribunal distinguished the cited case as it dealt with a different issue regarding the nomenclature of the company. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the dismissal of an application u/s 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code due to improper service of notice u/s 8. The notice was issued to Key Managerial Personnel (KMP) of the Corporate Debtor (CD) but not to the CD itself at its registered office as mandated by Rule 5(2)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016. Issuing notice u/s 8 on Form 3 to the CD at its registered office is a prerequisite for filing an application u/s 9 by the Operational Creditor (OC). The Tribunal distinguished the cited case as it dealt with a different issue regarding the nomenclature of the company. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
