Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 News - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Category: ?
Categorized by AI
---- All Categories ----
  • ---- All Categories ----
  • Income Tax
  • GST
  • Customs, DGFT & SEZ
  • FEMA & RBI
  • Corp. Laws, SEBI & IBC
  • PMLA, Black Money & ED
  • Budget
  • News and Press Release
  • PTI News
Month:
---- All Months ----
  • ---- All Months ----
  • January
  • February
  • March
  • April
  • May
  • June
  • July
  • August
  • September
  • October
  • November
  • December
Year:
---- All Years ----
  • ---- All Years ----
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      News
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      News

      Back

      All News

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        News

        Back

        All News

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Corp. Laws / SEBI / IBC

        SC raps ex-promoters of Bhushan Steel for delay tactics as it upholds JSW's resolution plan

        September 26, 2025

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        New Delhi, Sep 26 (PTI) The Supreme Court on Friday made scathing observations on the conduct of Bhushan Power and Steel Limited's former promoters, led by Sanjay Singal, accusing them of systematically attempting to stall the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP).

        The observations were made in a judgment delivered by a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) B R Gavai and Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and K Vinod Chandran while upholding JSW Steel's Rs 19,700-crore resolution plan for debt-ridden Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (BPSL).

        It upheld the February 17, 2020 verdict of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), allowing JSW Steel to acquire BPSL by providing it immunity from prosecution by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

        Writing the judgment, the CJI underscored that the former BPSL promoters' actions were not aimed at constructive participation in the resolution process, but rather at frustrating its timely conclusion.

        "The entire attempt of the appellants has been to thwart the CIRP and not to permit the same to be taken to its logical end," the judgment read.

        The bench drew attention to the records placed before it, including the findings of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which had earlier censured the promoters for adopting dilatory tactics.

        The court took note of the submissions made by the successful resolution applicant, JSW Steel, that Sanjay Singal attended only one of the 46 Committee of Creditors (CoC) meetings in person and just two more through his representatives.

        His wife and co-promoter, Aarti Singal, did not attend a single CoC meeting.

        "It can thus be seen that after the NCLT had heard the matter in detail, various applications had been filed by the erstwhile management, including Sanjay Singal, before 48 various forums. This had led to a delay in the pronouncement of the approval order by the NCLT.

        "A specific observation has been made by the NCLT that the erstwhile promoters were making efforts to cause delays, which indicated how desperate and frustrated they were. The NCLT also imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the appellants -- the erstwhile promoters -- as it concluded that the application seeking copies of the resolution plan filed by them was frivolous," the judgment said.

        The court said it could clearly be seen that the entire attempt of the former promoters was to thwart the insolvency proceedings and "not permit the same to be taken to a logical end".

        The bench then proceeded to deal with the issues on merits. It said the approach reflected a "lackluster participation" by those who had once controlled the company but were now expected to engage responsibly in the resolution process.

        The NCLT, in its 2019 order approving the JSW plan, had already recorded the promoters' disinterest, highlighting that they appeared more focussed on procedural manoeuvring than on constructive engagement.

        The judgment noted how, after extensive hearings before the NCLT, the erstwhile management filed multiple applications across various forums, leading to delays in the pronouncement of the resolution order.

        The NCLT, in fact, explicitly observed that the promoters were "moving places to delay the conclusion of proceedings", and even imposed a penalty of Rs 1 lakh on them for filing a frivolous plea seeking copies of the resolution plan. PTI SJK RC

        Corporate insolvency delay tactics condemned as obstructive, with approval of resolution plan and enforcement immunity affirmed. The judgment finds that former promoters engaged in deliberate delay and minimal participation in the corporate insolvency resolution process, filing serial applications and making frivolous requests that frustrated timely conclusion. The court upheld prior tribunal determinations approving the resolution applicant's proposal and recognized procedural protections included in the resolution framework, noting that costs and adverse observations against the promoters were justified by their obstructive conduct.
                          Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
                            Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

                                Corporate insolvency delay tactics condemned as obstructive, with approval of resolution plan and enforcement immunity affirmed.

                                The judgment finds that former promoters engaged in deliberate delay and minimal participation in the corporate insolvency resolution process, filing serial applications and making frivolous requests that frustrated timely conclusion. The court upheld prior tribunal determinations approving the resolution applicant's proposal and recognized procedural protections included in the resolution framework, noting that costs and adverse observations against the promoters were justified by their obstructive conduct.





                                Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                                Topics

                                ActsIncome Tax
                                No Records Found