https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90102 The NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT's dismissal of a Section 7 petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The NCLT had rejected the petition claiming it was aimed at recovery rather than resolution, constituting misuse of IBC provisions. The NCLAT held that once debt and default are established, the NCLT has no discretion to refuse admission under Section 7, citing Supreme Court precedents in M Suresh Kumar Reddy and Innoventive Industries. The corporate debtor had acknowledged both debt and default, which was recorded in the impugned order. The NCLAT rejected intervention by an unrelated third party lacking locus standi and dismissed arguments regarding prejudice to homebuyers, emphasizing that CIRP initiation cannot be rejected when debt and default are clearly established. en-us Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:49 +0530 Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90102 The NCLAT allowed the appeal and set aside the NCLT's dismissal of a Section 7 petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The NCLT had rejected the petition claiming it was aimed at recovery rather than resolution, constituting misuse of IBC provisions. The NCLAT held that once debt and default are established, the NCLT has no discretion to refuse admission under Section 7, citing Supreme Court precedents in M Suresh Kumar Reddy and Innoventive Industries. The corporate debtor had acknowledged both debt and default, which was recorded in the impugned order. The NCLAT rejected intervention by an unrelated third party lacking locus standi and dismissed arguments regarding prejudice to homebuyers, emphasizing that CIRP initiation cannot be rejected when debt and default are clearly established. Highlights IBC Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:49 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90102