https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784513 The dominant issue was whether an auction of an attached movable asset of the corporate debtor was void for contravening the moratorium under s.14 IBC. Since permission to sell was granted by the criminal court and the auction was conducted pursuant to that order before commencement of CIRP, s.14 IBC was inapplicable; consequently, the auction could not be treated as undertaken in violation of the moratorium, and the order setting it aside was unsustainable. A connected issue was the AA's jurisdiction to interfere with such auction; the AA lacked jurisdiction to annul an auction conducted under prior criminal court orders, warranting no further directions. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Jan 2026 12:18:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784513 The dominant issue was whether an auction of an attached movable asset of the corporate debtor was void for contravening the moratorium under s.14 IBC. Since permission to sell was granted by the criminal court and the auction was conducted pursuant to that order before commencement of CIRP, s.14 IBC was inapplicable; consequently, the auction could not be treated as undertaken in violation of the moratorium, and the order setting it aside was unsustainable. A connected issue was the AA's jurisdiction to interfere with such auction; the AA lacked jurisdiction to annul an auction conducted under prior criminal court orders, warranting no further directions. The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784513