https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430379 The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's claim of Rs. 7,33,372 under Section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the appellant failed to serve the required notice period before submitting the claim. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the validity of the auction process and the inclusion of leasehold land in the liquidation estate under Section 60(5)(c) of the Code, stating that leasehold rights are intangible assets that can be part of the assets for e-auction as a "Going Concern." en-us Fri, 04 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Nov 2022 10:33:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430379 The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's claim of Rs. 7,33,372 under Section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, as the appellant failed to serve the required notice period before submitting the claim. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the validity of the auction process and the inclusion of leasehold land in the liquidation estate under Section 60(5)(c) of the Code, stating that leasehold rights are intangible assets that can be part of the assets for e-auction as a "Going Concern." Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 04 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430379