https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788327 The article addresses two questions: first, whether an excluded third party claim for provident fund dues can be recovered or accorded priority after the liquidation estate was lawfully exhausted to meet CIRP and liquidation costs; applying the principle that statutory process costs and insolvency expenses take priority and cannot be deferred without frustrating the insolvency regime, the tribunal declined reallocation or recovery of already distributed funds. Second, whether dissolution is proper where liquidation is complete; holding that dissolution under the liquidation scheme is appropriate when assets are fully liquidated, claims settled and no revival is possible. Both outcomes rest on the admitted factual exhaustion of the liquidation estate. en-us Thu, 13 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Mar 2026 08:35:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788327 The article addresses two questions: first, whether an excluded third party claim for provident fund dues can be recovered or accorded priority after the liquidation estate was lawfully exhausted to meet CIRP and liquidation costs; applying the principle that statutory process costs and insolvency expenses take priority and cannot be deferred without frustrating the insolvency regime, the tribunal declined reallocation or recovery of already distributed funds. Second, whether dissolution is proper where liquidation is complete; holding that dissolution under the liquidation scheme is appropriate when assets are fully liquidated, claims settled and no revival is possible. Both outcomes rest on the admitted factual exhaustion of the liquidation estate. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 13 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788327