https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284877 A corporate debtor seeking CIRP under section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found to have suppressed a material fact: an existing High Court winding-up and liquidation order. The text notes that Rule 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 required prompt disclosure of such proceedings, and that section 11(d) barred a debtor against whom a liquidation order had been made from initiating CIRP. On that basis, the application was treated as not maintainable, rejected, and exposed to penal consequences under section 77(a). en-us Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 15 Dec 2019 10:05:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284877 A corporate debtor seeking CIRP under section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found to have suppressed a material fact: an existing High Court winding-up and liquidation order. The text notes that Rule 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 required prompt disclosure of such proceedings, and that section 11(d) barred a debtor against whom a liquidation order had been made from initiating CIRP. On that basis, the application was treated as not maintainable, rejected, and exposed to penal consequences under section 77(a). Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284877