https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431939 An insolvency professional must hold a valid authorisation for assignment on the date of accepting a fresh liquidation assignment; deemed issuance under the Model Bye-Laws or a later grant does not retrospectively cure earlier non-compliance. An interim order of the Madras High Court confined to disciplinary proceedings did not restrain removal proceedings in the liquidation matter or prevent scrutiny of the liquidator's eligibility. The Adjudicating Authority, having power to appoint a liquidator under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, also had power to replace him for sufficient cause. The appeal therefore failed and the order replacing the liquidator was upheld. en-us Tue, 20 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Dec 2022 11:07:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431939 An insolvency professional must hold a valid authorisation for assignment on the date of accepting a fresh liquidation assignment; deemed issuance under the Model Bye-Laws or a later grant does not retrospectively cure earlier non-compliance. An interim order of the Madras High Court confined to disciplinary proceedings did not restrain removal proceedings in the liquidation matter or prevent scrutiny of the liquidator's eligibility. The Adjudicating Authority, having power to appoint a liquidator under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, also had power to replace him for sufficient cause. The appeal therefore failed and the order replacing the liquidator was upheld. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 20 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431939