https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774157 Once financial debt and default were admitted, CIRP could not be refused on a broad reading of Vidarbha Industries or on the corporate debtor's asserted going-concern status; the NCLAT treated discretion under Section 7 as narrowly confined and held that admission was warranted. Pendency of SARFAESI and DRT recovery actions did not bar the insolvency petition, and unproven allegations of mala fides or recovery-driven motive did not attract Section 65. A third party lacked locus to oppose admission, and the objection based on absence of a provisional NOC failed because the restructuring had already been validly revoked after breach of the repayment schedule. en-us Tue, 01 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774157 Once financial debt and default were admitted, CIRP could not be refused on a broad reading of Vidarbha Industries or on the corporate debtor's asserted going-concern status; the NCLAT treated discretion under Section 7 as narrowly confined and held that admission was warranted. Pendency of SARFAESI and DRT recovery actions did not bar the insolvency petition, and unproven allegations of mala fides or recovery-driven motive did not attract Section 65. A third party lacked locus to oppose admission, and the objection based on absence of a provisional NOC failed because the restructuring had already been validly revoked after breach of the repayment schedule. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 01 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774157