https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427279 The appeal was dismissed, upholding the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of I.A. No. 656/KB/2022. The Appellant's challenge against the rejection was based on the Resolution Professional's alleged failure to follow necessary steps in the insolvency resolution process. The judgment clarified the roles and responsibilities outlined in Section 18 and Regulation 34A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, emphasizing the authority of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in approving costs and valuation reports. The decision for liquidation was upheld, highlighting the CoC's discretion in such matters, ultimately affirming the rejection of the appeal. en-us Mon, 05 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Sep 2022 07:08:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427279 The appeal was dismissed, upholding the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of I.A. No. 656/KB/2022. The Appellant's challenge against the rejection was based on the Resolution Professional's alleged failure to follow necessary steps in the insolvency resolution process. The judgment clarified the roles and responsibilities outlined in Section 18 and Regulation 34A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, emphasizing the authority of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in approving costs and valuation reports. The decision for liquidation was upheld, highlighting the CoC's discretion in such matters, ultimately affirming the rejection of the appeal. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 05 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427279