https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786098 In disciplinary review under Article 226, a writ court may interfere where the penalty is grossly disproportionate, the process is procedurally flawed, or unexplained delay has caused material prejudice. The High Court found that the insolvency professional had disclosed the support-service arrangement, the earmarked sums were disbursed to the relevant team members, and no finding of personal enrichment or diversion of funds was recorded. It also treated the nearly one-year delay in concluding proceedings, during which assignment rights remained suspended, as aggravating the prejudice. On proportionality grounds, the one-year suspension of registration was reduced to the period already undergone. en-us Mon, 02 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Feb 2026 15:04:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786098 In disciplinary review under Article 226, a writ court may interfere where the penalty is grossly disproportionate, the process is procedurally flawed, or unexplained delay has caused material prejudice. The High Court found that the insolvency professional had disclosed the support-service arrangement, the earmarked sums were disbursed to the relevant team members, and no finding of personal enrichment or diversion of funds was recorded. It also treated the nearly one-year delay in concluding proceedings, during which assignment rights remained suspended, as aggravating the prejudice. On proportionality grounds, the one-year suspension of registration was reduced to the period already undergone. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 02 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786098