Withdrawal of insolvency proceedings under Section 12A of the IBC at the liquidation stage was held impermissible because the statute confines Section 12A to the CIRP stage, and extending it into Chapter III would contradict legislative intent and distort the liquidation framework; accordingly, the application seeking withdrawal was rightly rejected. Invocation of inherent powers to bypass this express exclusion was disallowed since inherent powers cannot operate in a field expressly governed and consciously limited by Section 12A; hence, no interference with the impugned order was warranted. The plea to refer the matter to a larger Bench on alleged divergent co-ordinate views was rejected on the facts, and the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
Withdrawal of insolvency proceedings under Section 12A of the IBC at the liquidation stage was held impermissible because the statute confines Section 12A to the CIRP stage, and extending it into Chapter III would contradict legislative intent and distort the liquidation framework; accordingly, the application seeking withdrawal was rightly rejected. Invocation of inherent powers to bypass this express exclusion was disallowed since inherent powers cannot operate in a field expressly governed and consciously limited by Section 12A; hence, no interference with the impugned order was warranted. The plea to refer the matter to a larger Bench on alleged divergent co-ordinate views was rejected on the facts, and the appeal was dismissed. - NCLAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
