https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428181 The Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the Company Petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the Corporate Debtor did not contest it. The Corporate Debtor admitted default and liability, leading to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). An Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed to manage the Corporate Debtor during CIRP, with specific responsibilities outlined. The Tribunal's decision was based on the petition meeting legal requirements, the default amount exceeding the minimum under the IBC, and the Corporate Debtor's acknowledgment of liability. en-us Tue, 20 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Sep 2022 13:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428181 The Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear the Company Petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the Corporate Debtor did not contest it. The Corporate Debtor admitted default and liability, leading to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). An Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed to manage the Corporate Debtor during CIRP, with specific responsibilities outlined. The Tribunal's decision was based on the petition meeting legal requirements, the default amount exceeding the minimum under the IBC, and the Corporate Debtor's acknowledgment of liability. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 20 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428181