https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783928 Whether a belated statutory claim could be entertained after liquidation had attained finality under the IBC was the dominant issue. The Appellate Tribunal held that once assets have been distributed in accordance with the s.53 waterfall and the liquidation stage is concluded, the process cannot be reopened; limitation is integral to liquidation and Regulation 44(1) requires timely completion, precluding interference even on equitable grounds. As the claimant filed its claim long after the invitation period and pursued the appeal after an inordinate delay, the rejection of the claim and refusal to revive the concluded liquidation process were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783928 Whether a belated statutory claim could be entertained after liquidation had attained finality under the IBC was the dominant issue. The Appellate Tribunal held that once assets have been distributed in accordance with the s.53 waterfall and the liquidation stage is concluded, the process cannot be reopened; limitation is integral to liquidation and Regulation 44(1) requires timely completion, precluding interference even on equitable grounds. As the claimant filed its claim long after the invitation period and pursued the appeal after an inordinate delay, the rejection of the claim and refusal to revive the concluded liquidation process were upheld, and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Tue, 16 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783928