https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279820 The tribunal found the petition maintainable under Section 10 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) despite finalized Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) proceedings. It ruled that the Insolvency Resolution Process (IRP) should proceed for the entire debt, considering the prior actions under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA). The tribunal admitted the petition, appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), and initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), directing compliance with IBC provisions and treating the SICA-sanctioned scheme as an Approved Resolution Plan. en-us Fri, 13 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279820 The tribunal found the petition maintainable under Section 10 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) despite finalized Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) proceedings. It ruled that the Insolvency Resolution Process (IRP) should proceed for the entire debt, considering the prior actions under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA). The tribunal admitted the petition, appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), and initiated the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), directing compliance with IBC provisions and treating the SICA-sanctioned scheme as an Approved Resolution Plan. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 13 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279820