Notre groupe organise plus de 3 000 séries de conférences Événements chaque année aux États-Unis, en Europe et en Europe. Asie avec le soutien de 1 000 autres Sociétés scientifiques et publie plus de 700 Open Access Revues qui contiennent plus de 50 000 personnalités éminentes, des scientifiques réputés en tant que membres du comité de rédaction.
Les revues en libre accès gagnent plus de lecteurs et de citations
700 revues et 15 000 000 de lecteurs Chaque revue attire plus de 25 000 lecteurs
Mayank Udhwani
The object of this article is to analyse §29A(d) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 under the lens of the concept of Corporate Criminal Liability. §29A, which was inserted vide an amendment act of 2018, lays down 10 criteria which disqualifies a person from submitting a resolution plan. Clause (d) bars a person from submitting a resolution plan if such a person is convicted of an offence punishable with imprisonment for two years or more. The question of interpretation of §29A(d) was determined by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) vide its order dated 10th August 2018 in the matter of Renaissance Steel India Pvt. Ltd. v. Electrosteels Steel India Ltd. In this article, the author will establish that §29A(d) does not apply to corporate person, except in two cases discussed in section B.2 of this article. To buttress his claim, the author will present a line of argument, which was not raised before the NCLAT. Lastly, the author presents a case against purposive interpretation of §29A(d) to conclusively establish that juristic entities fall outside the purview of §29A(d) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.