https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363325 Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as conferring jurisdiction to entertain challenges arising out of insolvency resolution proceedings, though the power was described as supervisory and to be used sparingly in extraordinary situations. Applying that standard, the Tribunal found the eligibility condition in the invitation for expression of interest requiring a minimum tangible net worth of Rs. 400 crores to be arbitrary and unreasonable because it was disproportionate to the debt profile, lacked rational correlation with viable resolution, and excluded major industry participants. The impugned criterion was interfered with and the resolution professional and committee of creditors were directed to revisit and republish revised eligibility criteria. en-us Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2018 07:44:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363325 Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as conferring jurisdiction to entertain challenges arising out of insolvency resolution proceedings, though the power was described as supervisory and to be used sparingly in extraordinary situations. Applying that standard, the Tribunal found the eligibility condition in the invitation for expression of interest requiring a minimum tangible net worth of Rs. 400 crores to be arbitrary and unreasonable because it was disproportionate to the debt profile, lacked rational correlation with viable resolution, and excluded major industry participants. The impugned criterion was interfered with and the resolution professional and committee of creditors were directed to revisit and republish revised eligibility criteria. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 26 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363325