https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426135 A winding up order kept in abeyance through revival arrangements does not amount to a formal permanent stay unless the statutory requirements for stay under Section 466 of the Companies Act, 1956 are formally satisfied; the Court indicated that a permanent stay could still be ordered after audit and claim verification. Claims of creditors and workers were to be determined with reference to the date of the winding up order, not the date of reference to BIFR. The existing three-member management committee was found unworkable and was replaced by a one-member committee headed by a retired Chief Justice for the limited purpose of audit, inventory and claim ascertainment. en-us Fri, 05 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Aug 2022 11:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426135 A winding up order kept in abeyance through revival arrangements does not amount to a formal permanent stay unless the statutory requirements for stay under Section 466 of the Companies Act, 1956 are formally satisfied; the Court indicated that a permanent stay could still be ordered after audit and claim verification. Claims of creditors and workers were to be determined with reference to the date of the winding up order, not the date of reference to BIFR. The existing three-member management committee was found unworkable and was replaced by a one-member committee headed by a retired Chief Justice for the limited purpose of audit, inventory and claim ascertainment. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 05 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426135