https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371905 Proceedings arising from a Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction opinion under Section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 were treated as a distinct class, and the transfer regime under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the 2016 Transfer Rules did not require automatic movement of those matters to the Tribunal; they continued before the High Court unless transfer was later sought under the amended proviso. An independent Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was held to be maintainable despite pending winding up proceedings, because the Code has overriding effect under Section 238 and is not displaced by Section 434. The NCLT could therefore admit the insolvency petition and the resolution process proceed. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jul 2025 16:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371905 Proceedings arising from a Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction opinion under Section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 were treated as a distinct class, and the transfer regime under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the 2016 Transfer Rules did not require automatic movement of those matters to the Tribunal; they continued before the High Court unless transfer was later sought under the amended proviso. An independent Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was held to be maintainable despite pending winding up proceedings, because the Code has overriding effect under Section 238 and is not displaced by Section 434. The NCLT could therefore admit the insolvency petition and the resolution process proceed. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 12 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371905