https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761228 Valuation of the corporate debtor was treated as a factual exercise, and the adoption of the average of the two closest estimates found no procedural infirmity, so interference was unwarranted. An approved resolution plan was applied under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; pre-resolution statutory dues and lease-related claims not provided for in the plan stood extinguished, and post-approval recovery proceedings could not continue. The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors remained non-justiciable beyond the narrow statutory limits. Inconsistent obligations under NSEZ requirements and related transfer charges could not override the approved plan, which was left undisturbed. en-us Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Sep 2025 15:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761228 Valuation of the corporate debtor was treated as a factual exercise, and the adoption of the average of the two closest estimates found no procedural infirmity, so interference was unwarranted. An approved resolution plan was applied under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016; pre-resolution statutory dues and lease-related claims not provided for in the plan stood extinguished, and post-approval recovery proceedings could not continue. The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors remained non-justiciable beyond the narrow statutory limits. Inconsistent obligations under NSEZ requirements and related transfer charges could not override the approved plan, which was left undisturbed. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761228