https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782339 NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the HC's order permitting the Liquidator to treat the assets/inventory lying in the leased premises as part of the liquidation estate of the corporate debtor. The Tribunal held that the burden to rebut the presumption of ownership lay on the Appellant, who failed to produce reliable contemporaneous evidence or invoices to prove that the disputed assets belonged to it. The Appellant's prolonged silence during CIRP and liquidation was treated as tacit acquiescence. As the assets had already been auctioned, sale certificate issued, and proceeds distributed, NCLAT found no infirmity in the Liquidator's actions and restrained the Appellant from obstructing removal of the assets. en-us Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:24:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782339 NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the HC's order permitting the Liquidator to treat the assets/inventory lying in the leased premises as part of the liquidation estate of the corporate debtor. The Tribunal held that the burden to rebut the presumption of ownership lay on the Appellant, who failed to produce reliable contemporaneous evidence or invoices to prove that the disputed assets belonged to it. The Appellant's prolonged silence during CIRP and liquidation was treated as tacit acquiescence. As the assets had already been auctioned, sale certificate issued, and proceeds distributed, NCLAT found no infirmity in the Liquidator's actions and restrained the Appellant from obstructing removal of the assets. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782339