https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781058 Repeated hearing opportunities and the appellant's participation at multiple stages defeated the plea of procedural unfairness, so the request to recall the order on natural justice grounds failed. Section 66(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as a standalone fraudulent trading provision, operating independently of Section 66(2). On the facts, the sale of related-party shares at a sharply reduced value after an earlier higher-value purchase was found to show conduct carried on with intent to defraud creditors, justifying a contribution order. en-us Thu, 06 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Nov 2025 08:20:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781058 Repeated hearing opportunities and the appellant's participation at multiple stages defeated the plea of procedural unfairness, so the request to recall the order on natural justice grounds failed. Section 66(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as a standalone fraudulent trading provision, operating independently of Section 66(2). On the facts, the sale of related-party shares at a sharply reduced value after an earlier higher-value purchase was found to show conduct carried on with intent to defraud creditors, justifying a contribution order. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 06 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781058