<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (10) TMI 640 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429082</link>
    <description>An application for registration as an Insolvency Professional was rejected on the ground that consultancy and valuation work did not amount to the managerial experience required under the governing regulations. The HC held that the authority had to assess the nature of the applicant&#039;s professional and managerial experience against the eligibility criteria, including the material placed on comparable experience and the claimed examination and pre-registration course. Because the existing record was insufficient for a final conclusion, the rejection was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration. The authority was directed to permit additional documents and pass a reasoned speaking order on eligibility.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Oct 2022 08:50:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=693546" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 640 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429082</link>
      <description>An application for registration as an Insolvency Professional was rejected on the ground that consultancy and valuation work did not amount to the managerial experience required under the governing regulations. The HC held that the authority had to assess the nature of the applicant&#039;s professional and managerial experience against the eligibility criteria, including the material placed on comparable experience and the claimed examination and pre-registration course. Because the existing record was insufficient for a final conclusion, the rejection was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration. The authority was directed to permit additional documents and pass a reasoned speaking order on eligibility.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>