https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408826 A writ challenge to show-cause notices proposing wilful defaulter declaration failed as premature because the notices disclosed the grounds, allowed a written response, and caused no legal infringement at the notice stage; the communication by the Deputy General Manager did not create a jurisdictional defect. The Calcutta HC also held that pendency of corporate insolvency resolution proceedings and the moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code did not bar wilful defaulter proceedings, since such action is a credit-dissemination measure, not a recovery proceeding, and the moratorium protects the corporate debtor rather than a surety or person in control of the company during the relevant default. en-us Mon, 21 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jun 2021 09:15:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408826 A writ challenge to show-cause notices proposing wilful defaulter declaration failed as premature because the notices disclosed the grounds, allowed a written response, and caused no legal infringement at the notice stage; the communication by the Deputy General Manager did not create a jurisdictional defect. The Calcutta HC also held that pendency of corporate insolvency resolution proceedings and the moratorium under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code did not bar wilful defaulter proceedings, since such action is a credit-dissemination measure, not a recovery proceeding, and the moratorium protects the corporate debtor rather than a surety or person in control of the company during the relevant default. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 21 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408826