https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792038 In CIRP, the NCLAT reaffirmed that insolvency proceedings must be completed within the statutory timeline and that liquidation is justified when delay in refiling, reconsideration after remand, and placement of the revised resolution plan causes the process to languish beyond the permissible period. It held that Sections 12 and 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code support liquidation where no timely approved plan is available and delay erodes asset value. The Tribunal also declined to expunge adverse remarks against the erstwhile resolution professional, finding them supported by the record, including delayed meetings, no further extension sought, and prolonged delay in moving the approval application. en-us Wed, 20 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 May 2026 07:06:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792038 In CIRP, the NCLAT reaffirmed that insolvency proceedings must be completed within the statutory timeline and that liquidation is justified when delay in refiling, reconsideration after remand, and placement of the revised resolution plan causes the process to languish beyond the permissible period. It held that Sections 12 and 33 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code support liquidation where no timely approved plan is available and delay erodes asset value. The Tribunal also declined to expunge adverse remarks against the erstwhile resolution professional, finding them supported by the record, including delayed meetings, no further extension sought, and prolonged delay in moving the approval application. Case-Laws IBC Wed, 20 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792038