https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284207 The Tribunal concluded that the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) had the authority to file the application based on Supreme Court orders and regulatory mandates. It found that the impugned transactions were carried out with the intent to defraud creditors, deemed preferential and undervalued transactions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The transactions involving a related party were within the two-year look-back period, leading the Tribunal to declare them as fraudulent, preferential, and undervalued under the relevant Code sections. The Tribunal ordered the release of security interest and vested the properties in the Corporate Debtor. en-us Wed, 16 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Nov 2019 06:16:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284207 The Tribunal concluded that the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) had the authority to file the application based on Supreme Court orders and regulatory mandates. It found that the impugned transactions were carried out with the intent to defraud creditors, deemed preferential and undervalued transactions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The transactions involving a related party were within the two-year look-back period, leading the Tribunal to declare them as fraudulent, preferential, and undervalued under the relevant Code sections. The Tribunal ordered the release of security interest and vested the properties in the Corporate Debtor. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 16 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284207