https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306416 A notification issued under the removal of difficulties power cannot expand insolvency jurisdiction or validate proceedings beyond the parent statute. The text notes that the dispute was treated as covered by the earlier Spartek Ceramics ruling, under which the 24 May 2017 notification was held ineffective to confer jurisdiction on the Adjudicating Authority. It also refers to the interaction between a sanctioned revival scheme under the Sick Industrial Companies regime and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework, but the controlling principle remained that statutory limits on jurisdiction cannot be enlarged by subordinate notification. On that basis, the application was not maintainable and the impugned order was described as without jurisdiction. en-us Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Jan 2023 09:01:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306416 A notification issued under the removal of difficulties power cannot expand insolvency jurisdiction or validate proceedings beyond the parent statute. The text notes that the dispute was treated as covered by the earlier Spartek Ceramics ruling, under which the 24 May 2017 notification was held ineffective to confer jurisdiction on the Adjudicating Authority. It also refers to the interaction between a sanctioned revival scheme under the Sick Industrial Companies regime and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code framework, but the controlling principle remained that statutory limits on jurisdiction cannot be enlarged by subordinate notification. On that basis, the application was not maintainable and the impugned order was described as without jurisdiction. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306416