https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778676 NCLAT (PB, New Delhi) held that IBBI exceeded its power under Section 34(4)(b) by issuing a general circular directing that an IRP/RP not be appointed as liquidator in all cases; the provision permits recommending replacement of a particular RP based on that RP's conduct, not a blanket policy. The board's letter of 18.07.2023 could not serve as a basis to replace the RP or appoint an alternative insolvency professional. The adjudicating authority's appointment of the replacement liquidator was set aside and the appeal was allowed. en-us Thu, 18 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Sep 2025 08:38:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778676 NCLAT (PB, New Delhi) held that IBBI exceeded its power under Section 34(4)(b) by issuing a general circular directing that an IRP/RP not be appointed as liquidator in all cases; the provision permits recommending replacement of a particular RP based on that RP's conduct, not a blanket policy. The board's letter of 18.07.2023 could not serve as a basis to replace the RP or appoint an alternative insolvency professional. The adjudicating authority's appointment of the replacement liquidator was set aside and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 18 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778676