Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefi...
HC held that proceedings initiated by the 3rd Respondent before the DRT against the personal guarantor were without jurisdiction, as Section 60(1) IBC mandates that insolvency and related proceedings concerning corporate debtors and their personal guarantors lie before the NCLT. The Court ruled that applications under Section 95(1) are maintainable before NCLT irrespective of pendency of CIRP or liquidation. Consequently, the DRT's order dated 2 May 2022 was declared null and set aside. HC directed the DRT to transfer all pending proceedings in these matters to the NCLT within four weeks, while granting liberty to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to seek appropriate reliefs before NCLT.
HC held that proceedings initiated by the 3rd Respondent before the DRT against the personal guarantor were without jurisdiction, as Section 60(1) IBC mandates that insolvency and related proceedings concerning corporate debtors and their personal guarantors lie before the NCLT. The Court ruled that applications under Section 95(1) are maintainable before NCLT irrespective of pendency of CIRP or liquidation. Consequently, the DRT's order dated 2 May 2022 was declared null and set aside. HC directed the DRT to transfer all pending proceedings in these matters to the NCLT within four weeks, while granting liberty to the 2nd and 3rd Respondents to seek appropriate reliefs before NCLT.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
