https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284199 A Section 66 IBC application was treated as maintainable despite an earlier similar disposal because it relied on additional forensic audit material not previously before the Tribunal, so it was not rejected at the threshold on res judicata alone. The Tribunal also held that allegations of diversion of funds and irregularities shown in the forensic report were insufficient, by themselves, to justify direct recovery or attachment of the alleged amount. As the report was not conclusive and the affected parties had not had full opportunity to respond, the matter was referred for further investigation by the SFIO in accordance with natural justice and the statutory investigative framework. en-us Tue, 16 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Nov 2019 06:12:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284199 A Section 66 IBC application was treated as maintainable despite an earlier similar disposal because it relied on additional forensic audit material not previously before the Tribunal, so it was not rejected at the threshold on res judicata alone. The Tribunal also held that allegations of diversion of funds and irregularities shown in the forensic report were insufficient, by themselves, to justify direct recovery or attachment of the alleged amount. As the report was not conclusive and the affected parties had not had full opportunity to respond, the matter was referred for further investigation by the SFIO in accordance with natural justice and the statutory investigative framework. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 16 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284199