The National Company Law Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the National Company Law Tribunal’s  order that allowed an insolvency application. The Appellant stated that the date of default had not been mentioned in the Form-1 filed before the NCLT and, therefore, the application ought not to have been admitted. On

NCLT rules that where a financial creditor/debenture trustee (“petitioner”) has categorical rights over the secured asset, then no claim lies under sec.7 of IBC for non-payment of outstanding dues under Debenture Trust Deed (“DTD”) on account of petitioner’s agreement for the sale of a mortgaged asset for the realisation of

An appeal was filed in SAT. The appeal was brought in response to a common decision issued by the Whole Time Member (WTM) of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), which ordered the appellants to forfeit illegal earnings worth Rs. 4,55,91,232 along with interest at a rate of

A writ petition was filed with the issue questioning whether the Income Tax Department’s officials have the authority to notify a corporate debtor under Sec. 148 of the ITA of 1961 that they must submit a return in the required format for the assessment year that ended before the date

In a case filed by Union Bank of India(“petitioner”) before Rajasthan HC, the issue was the resolution adopted by RERA that all matters shall be resolved by a single bench as well as the decision made by a single member of RERA about a semi-completed residential complex in which the

Supreme Court of India was hearing a plea by the Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh, for the issue of the transfer of jurisdiction of DRT at Jabalpur to DRT at Lucknow as it was confusing to lawyers in the matter of jurisdiction. The case came before the bench constituting honourable

In an appeal preferred by The Bijnor Urban Cooperative Bank Limited to quash the writ of Mandamus passed by the Allahabad HC, the issue before SC was the direction issued through the Writ to positively consider the application of the borrower (respondent) for One Time Settlement (OTS). The division bench

In a case filed on behalf of M/s. Adama India Pvt. Ltd. (Applicant) to Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) in Gujarat. The issue raised was whether Input Tax Credit(ITC) can be availed for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities. The case came before the division bench comprised of Mr. Sanjay Saxena

A writ petition was filed by Tamil Nadu Electricity Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO) with an issue against the notice sent to TANGEDCO by the Competition Commission of India(CCI), before Justice S.M. Subramaniam of the High Court of Madras. Southern India Engineering Manufacturers’ Association filed a complaint to CCI

SAT upheld the order of SEBI, rejecting the appeal against the SEBI order imposing a penalty as the company and the directors (‘Appellants’) failed to undertake the activities as per regulation 24(2) r/w 23(1)(2A) of SEBI (Venture Capital Funds) Regulations (‘VCF Regulations’). The appellate tribunal observed that a 5-year scheme

SAT bench composed of Justice Tarun Agarwala and Justice M. T. Joshi upheld the impugned order as passed by SEBI which directed the MD of the company (‘Appellant’) to discharge the profits earned through wrongful means amounting to INR 1.74 Cr. and restrained him from trading in the market for

SEBI bench presided by Mr S.K. Mohanty allowed an interim order restraining an employee of Infosys (‘Noticee 1’) and another person connected to him (‘Noticee 2’ – who was an employee of Wipro) from the stock market for insider trading in the shares of Infosys, the bench states that the

The Delhi HC bench presided by Justice Yashwant Varma admitted the writ filed by the corporate debtor in a case related to the interplay of IBC and PMLA wherein the bench maintained the corporate debtor was entitled to initiate the liquidation process, thereby barring the ED (‘Respondent’) from taking any

The Appellant BSE Ltd., had filed an appeal against a decision by the NCLT that rejected its request to begin an insolvency resolution process against the Corporate Debtor, but the NCLAT dismissed the appeal and concluded that the Appellant had only started the insolvency proceedings as a means of recouping

The Supreme Court upheld the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s ruling that the RBI’s 2020 Merchant Trade Transactions (MTT) Guidelines, which were issued in the course of exercising its FEMA authority, were a proportionate measure to ensure that there was a sufficient domestic supply of PPE products in India and was

In the instant case, NCLAT opined that the Adjudicating Authority had erred in permitting Respondent’s claim of the fee until October 9, 2018, i.e., when IRP was replaced. Accordingly, NCLAT set aside NCLT order to the degree that it instructed CoC to pay the fees and expenditures to the previous

The Hon’ble Supreme Court ordered all parties involved in the resolution of Amtek Auto Ltd. (the Corporate Debtor), as per the Approved Resolution Plan submitted by Deccan Value Investors LP and/or parties associated with the implementation of the said resolution plan, including the Implementation and Monitoring Committee, to complete its

The Hon’ble Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court consisting of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Rajendra M. Sareen passed an order; directing the Revenue Department to issue GST registration to a firm undergoing liquidation and granted exemption concerning actions taken after the 6-month window due to the COVID-19 pandemic

Reliance Capital Ltd.’s request for the start of a CIRP under Section 227, read with Section 239(2) (zk) of the IBC, was accepted by NCLT because there is a debt and default involving more than Rs. 1000 Cr.; It was noted that –  (i) Due to defaults to several creditors,

The Competition Commission Of India dismissed the complaint against Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. on presuming cartelization through its various offices, and held that “The Informant has singularly failed to identify or array any cartel participants, much less indicate the modus and the details in respect of any such purported cartel.”

A Division bench of Justice  D Y. Chandrachud and Justice A.S. Bopanna, while hearing an appeal set aside NCLAT ruling upholding the NCLT interim order delaying notice of termination sent by TCS Ltd. (the “Appellant”) to the Corporate Debtor terminating a Facilities Agreement between the parties after the CIRP was

In an appeal filed by a housekeeping service provider in the health and hospitality industry (‘Appellant’), the challenge raised before the NCLAT was the infirmity in the NCLT’s order to not accept the Appellant’s application of insolvency under Sec. 9 of the Code.      The Appellant alleged that the Respondent (a

In a bid-rigging case filed on behalf of the Food Corporation of India (FCI) in the Competition Commission of India (CCI), the issue was against the OPs for infringement of Sec. 3(3)(d) of the Competition Act, 2002. OPs were involved in the determination of prices, bidding process manipulation, allocation of

Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. (DHFL) got released from the CBI case after the Hon’ble Bombay High Court overturned the CBI’s decision to refuse to release the Corporate Debtor from the CBI case and allow DHFL to be prosecuted through its former Directors under IBC Section 32A According to DHFL,

In ATE Projects Pvt. Ltd. v/s Rajasthan Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., NCLT Jaipur referred to the Company’s definition as defined under Section 2(20) of the Companies Act, which reads that a “Company,” includes a “Government Company,” as defined under Section 2(45) of that same statute. Noting the factual matrix and

The MCA invited public comments on the CBIRC draft and suggested modifications by December 15, 2021. Following the recommendations made in the report submitted by the Cross-Border Insolvency Rules/ Regulations Committee (the “CBIRC”) on draft rules, regulations, notifications, guidelines, and capacity building for cross-border insolvency, the MCA proposed to enact

The Hon’ble Supreme Court SC nullified the Delhi High Court’s decision upholding the DRT’s order that exempted the delay in applying Section 5 of the Limitation Act (extension of the prescribed period in certain cases) to the appeal under Section 30 of the Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1933 (the

The Hon’ble NCLT, while admitting that the Operational Creditor’s petition to initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor (a government-owned firm) held that “Since the Corporate Debtor, has not been performing any Governmental Functions or the Functions of State, the Corporate Debtor cannot be immune from the IBC proceedings merely based

Elektrans Shipping Pte Ltd. Vs Pierre D’silva (NCLAT Delhi) It was observed by the National Company Law Tribunal that even when the Registrar of Companies has removed the Company’s name, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) may be started under sections 7 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,

In a case filed in the Delhi High Court, the issue was regarding vacancies and appointments in the Adjudicatory Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The case came before the single-judge bench of Justice Pratibha M Singh. The counsel appearing for the respondent stated that there were

The part of the Ld. Single Judge’s order that held the Appellant authorities are to permit the Petitioners to operate the bank account and postal accounts were challenged by the PMLA Adjudicating Authority (the Appellant), and the Calcutta High Court granted the relief sought therein and stated that the provisional

Due to the failure to respond to the summonses sent to these two individuals in the instant case, during the investigation into potential insider trading and volume manipulation in the scrip of Videocon Industries Ltd., SEBI fined two people Rs. 5 lakh each for violating the procedure of law. According

The Hon’ble NCLT invalidated the Income Tax Department’s assessment decisions against the Corporate Debtor for the time frame prior to the initiation of the CIRP, and held that the same is bad in law.  The Hon’ble NCLT observed that –  (i) Throughout the moratorium, the IT Department continued the assessment

SAT bench rejected an application against the SEBI’s decision wherein it was stated that SEBI is of the opinion that the enquiry should be undertaken and an opportunity should be granted of personal hearing to the Appellants so that they can appear and submit their contentions, the bench upheld that

The Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) rejected the appeal against the SEBI judgment clearing the Respondents of any insider trading allegations in 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. and Multi Commodity Exchange (MCX) shares, concluding that the appellants cannot in any way be considered “aggrieved people.” While considering whether the appeal is maintainable,

The National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai while hearing a Company Scheme Petition permitted to amend the composite scheme with effect to the removal of Tata Power Solar Systems Ltd. from the list of parties and put on record the Amended Composite Scheme of Arrangement. The Appellate Authority, while discussing the

A writ was filed for a case where the MHA issued the LOC i.e., Look Out Circular and its extensions at the appeal of the Revenue to halt the Petitioner from traveling overseas due to the risk of fines and legal action for unreported foreign assets and interests in foreign

The Hon’ble Jharkhand High Court denied a request to revoke a summons order issued to the Petitioner Company and any related legal actions brought against the District Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, CBI, as a result of a special trial PMLA complaint made by the ED for the conduct of a money

In an appeal filed by RP in NCLAT against the NCLT order, the issue raised was that the NCLT has no legal power to act on the matters under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. The appeal was heard by Dr. Ashok K Mishra (Member – Technical), Shri.

SEBI amended the interim order imposed against 8 Entities for allegedly trading in Infosys’ stock while in possession of UPSI, i.e., the company’s audited financial figures for the three months ending June 30, 2020, pointing out that the Entities’ arguments and supporting evidence partially refute the initial findings made in