https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424025 The Special Court's jurisdiction to try offences under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was affirmed because such offences are triable by Special Courts constituted under Chapter XXVIII of the Companies Act, 2013, and the notified court had been vested with authority to hear the prosecution. On the merits, the Court found prima facie material that the accused persons, being in charge of the corporate debtor, failed to cooperate with the resolution professional, withheld books and financial records, and did not comply with directions issued in the insolvency proceedings. As the complaint was filed by a public servant in official capacity, pre-summoning evidence was dispensed with, cognizance was taken, and summons were issued to all five accused. en-us Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jun 2022 22:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424025 The Special Court's jurisdiction to try offences under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was affirmed because such offences are triable by Special Courts constituted under Chapter XXVIII of the Companies Act, 2013, and the notified court had been vested with authority to hear the prosecution. On the merits, the Court found prima facie material that the accused persons, being in charge of the corporate debtor, failed to cooperate with the resolution professional, withheld books and financial records, and did not comply with directions issued in the insolvency proceedings. As the complaint was filed by a public servant in official capacity, pre-summoning evidence was dispensed with, cognizance was taken, and summons were issued to all five accused. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424025