https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399895 The Tribunal held that electricity bills raised for consumption during CIRP could not be kept in abeyance where the Corporate Debtor's subsidy or reimbursement claim was already pending before the High Court. It found that any concession under the policy could operate only within the statutory framework, and that the distribution company could not unilaterally waive or vary tariff without the State Government making the required financial arrangement. On those facts, the Tribunal refused to grant an indirect suspension of current charges and rejected the request for interim relief against recovery of the bills. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Oct 2020 10:30:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399895 The Tribunal held that electricity bills raised for consumption during CIRP could not be kept in abeyance where the Corporate Debtor's subsidy or reimbursement claim was already pending before the High Court. It found that any concession under the policy could operate only within the statutory framework, and that the distribution company could not unilaterally waive or vary tariff without the State Government making the required financial arrangement. On those facts, the Tribunal refused to grant an indirect suspension of current charges and rejected the request for interim relief against recovery of the bills. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 04 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=399895