https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432507 A corporate debtor's Section 10 IBC application was held liable to rejection where surrounding facts showed fraudulent and malicious initiation, including unfinished projects, substantial claims and litigation, director resignations before filing, and transposition of a director as a financial creditor. Section 65 was applied to prevent admission of a tainted insolvency petition despite debt and default. The application was also held not barred by Section 10A because the default pre-dated 25 March 2020, and a later demand notice merely reiterated an earlier default. The objection that insolvency could not be invoked before exhausting remedies under Uttar Pradesh urban development law was rejected because that alternative remedy did not make the petition premature. en-us Thu, 05 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Jan 2023 08:48:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432507 A corporate debtor's Section 10 IBC application was held liable to rejection where surrounding facts showed fraudulent and malicious initiation, including unfinished projects, substantial claims and litigation, director resignations before filing, and transposition of a director as a financial creditor. Section 65 was applied to prevent admission of a tainted insolvency petition despite debt and default. The application was also held not barred by Section 10A because the default pre-dated 25 March 2020, and a later demand notice merely reiterated an earlier default. The objection that insolvency could not be invoked before exhausting remedies under Uttar Pradesh urban development law was rejected because that alternative remedy did not make the petition premature. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 05 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432507