https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429373 Leasehold rights acquired by a corporate debtor under a long-term lease were treated as an intangible asset within section 18(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, because the lease conferred vested commercial rights of use, development, and conditional transfer, distinct from ownership of the underlying land. The explanation to section 18(f) was held to exclude only third-party assets held in trust or under different contractual arrangements, not leasehold interests. Accordingly, the resolution professional was entitled to take custody and control of the leasehold rights during CIRP, while the land itself was not treated as the debtor's owned asset. The appeal failed and the impugned order was sustained. en-us Fri, 21 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Oct 2022 07:49:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429373 Leasehold rights acquired by a corporate debtor under a long-term lease were treated as an intangible asset within section 18(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, because the lease conferred vested commercial rights of use, development, and conditional transfer, distinct from ownership of the underlying land. The explanation to section 18(f) was held to exclude only third-party assets held in trust or under different contractual arrangements, not leasehold interests. Accordingly, the resolution professional was entitled to take custody and control of the leasehold rights during CIRP, while the land itself was not treated as the debtor's owned asset. The appeal failed and the impugned order was sustained. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 21 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429373