<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Suspended Director&#039;s Appeal Dismissed; Payment Deemed Preferential Under Insolvency Code&#039;s Waterfall Mechanism.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82988</link>
    <description>This appeal arose u/s 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed by the Suspended Director against the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order. The Liquidator had obtained a Transaction Audit Report, which identified a payment of Rs. 3,67,900/- to the Suspended Director as a preferential transaction. The Adjudicating Authority rightly noted that this payment placed the Suspended Director in a beneficial position against the provisions of Section 53, which prioritizes secured creditors and workmen over unsecured creditors. The Suspended Director could have staked his claim for the outstanding unsecured loan u/s 53&#039;s waterfall mechanism. Since the Liquidator formed an opinion based on the Transaction Audit Report and filed an application be.....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Nov 2024 08:42:41 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Nov 2024 08:42:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777305" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Suspended Director&#039;s Appeal Dismissed; Payment Deemed Preferential Under Insolvency Code&#039;s Waterfall Mechanism.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82988</link>
      <description>This appeal arose u/s 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed by the Suspended Director against the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order. The Liquidator had obtained a Transaction Audit Report, which identified a payment of Rs. 3,67,900/- to the Suspended Director as a preferential transaction. The Adjudicating Authority rightly noted that this payment placed the Suspended Director in a beneficial position against the provisions of Section 53, which prioritizes secured creditors and workmen over unsecured creditors. The Suspended Director could have staked his claim for the outstanding unsecured loan u/s 53&#039;s waterfall mechanism. Since the Liquidator formed an opinion based on the Transaction Audit Report and filed an application be.....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Nov 2024 08:42:41 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82988</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>