Author wise: Editors

Is a Resolution Professional a Public Servant under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988?, Supreme Court issues notice in SLP against Jharkhand High Court decision

Posted by on in Case Analysis, Topic wise Article -IBC & Companies Act

Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued notice to Central Bureau of Investigation, as respondent, vide order dated 28.06.2023 on the SLP1 filed against the judgment of Jharkhand High Court. Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court in the order dated 05.04.2023 in the matter Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Bureau, Dhanbad, reported at (2023) ibclaw.in 209 HC held that resolution professional will come within the meaning of a public servant under Section 2(c) the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for the reason that definition of public servant as given under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 is very wide and expansive. It is not limited to those serving under the Government or its instrumentalities and drawing salary from the public exchequer.

Impact of recent amendments in CIRP and Information Utilities Regulations on filing of CIRP application under Section 7 or 9 of IBC and conducting CIRP – By Adv. Nipun Singhvi and Editorial Team

Posted by on in Experts Corner, Partial Protected

This Research Paper decodes the amendments with respect to the existing provisions in the Code and Regulations, impact on initiation/filing of new CIRP application after these amendments came into force, impact of amendments in Information Utility Regulations on filing of CIRP application and covers other relevant issues: Furnishing of Copy of Form GSTR-1, Form GSTR-3B and Copy of e-Way Bill is mandatory for filing CIRP under Section 9 of IBC; Submissions GSTRs and e-Way Bill with filing of claim; Cases where the generation of e-Way Bill is not a requirement; Submission of PAN and email address of Financial/Operational Creditor alongwith CIRP application; Fixing the responsibility of Promoters/Management to submit information within time and as per format sought by IRP/RP; Creditors’ Assistance: Assist in preparing the information memorandum, getting valuation determined and in conducting the CIRP and Assist in dealing with avoidance applications after closure of a CIRP; Difference in valuations during a CIRP and a threshold for appointment of a third valuer; Dealing with avoidance applications after closure of a CIRP; Amendments in Information Utilities Regulations regarding filing of CIRP; Brief about the process of Information of Default and Record of Default in an Information Utility

Whether the provisions of Section 194-IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are inconsistent with Section 53(1)(e) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016? – NCLAT Landmark Judgment

Posted by on in IBC-Case Laws

In order to access this content, you’re required to subscribe to Module/iPlan, Click here to know more about subscription features. In case you've already subscribed, following reason maybe restrict you:

  • Your subscription has expired, you can check here status of your existing subscription or
  • You may not have subscription of the Module/iPlan in which this content is published. Click here for more details.

If you are still facing any issue in login, WhatsApp us : +91 9577994433 or Click here to WhatsApp us.

Simultaneously initiation of CIRPs against Principal Borrower and Corporate Guarantor and Filing of Claim and Appointment of Resolution Professional in the both CIRPs- Analysis of SBI Vs. Athena Energy Ventures Private Limited

Posted by on in Articles

NCLAT in a recent judgment comments on the earlier two members’ bench judgment in Piramal Case that "in the matter of Piramal, the Bench of this Appellate Tribunal “interpreted” the law. Ordinarily, we would respect and adopt the interpretation but for the reasons discussed above, we are unable to interpret the law in the manner it was interpreted in the matter of Piramal".  Also, the NCLAT in the recent judgment didn’t consider the three members’ bench judgment of Shabad Khan Vs. M/s. Nisus Finance and Investment Manager & Ors.

Whether Appellate Tribunal have power to extend Time limit u/s 12 of IBC beyond 330 days.

Posted by on in Articles1 Comment

Whether Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) have power to extend Time limit under section 12 of IBC beyond 330 days. On 23rd March, Hon'ble Supreme Court extended the period of limitation on filing petitions, applications, suits, appeals, and other proceedings at courts…

Read More Whether Appellate Tribunal have power to extend Time limit u/s 12 of IBC beyond 330 days.