https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94717 NCLAT held that under Sec. 34(1) and 34(4)(c) IBC, only the CoC is competent to select a replacement resolution professional to act as liquidator, while the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) has only the power to formally appoint the RP so selected, subject to Board confirmation under Sec. 27. The Adjudicating Authority cannot suo motu appoint a liquidator of its own choice. On facts, CoC's decision to appoint M/s Stress Credit Resolution Pvt. Ltd. as liquidator was upheld, subject to its recognition as RP and confirmation by the Board. Orders of NCLT, Indore Bench, were set aside and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:10 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94717 NCLAT held that under Sec. 34(1) and 34(4)(c) IBC, only the CoC is competent to select a replacement resolution professional to act as liquidator, while the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) has only the power to formally appoint the RP so selected, subject to Board confirmation under Sec. 27. The Adjudicating Authority cannot suo motu appoint a liquidator of its own choice. On facts, CoC's decision to appoint M/s Stress Credit Resolution Pvt. Ltd. as liquidator was upheld, subject to its recognition as RP and confirmation by the Board. Orders of NCLT, Indore Bench, were set aside and the appeal was allowed. Highlights IBC Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:10 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94717