This blog delves into the trusteeship decision, which enunciates that incomplete and informal restructuring discussions cannot be relied upon to hinder the statutory trigger of insolvency once debt and default are established.

The growing use of reverse CIRP and the acknowledgment received by the IBBI and MCA highlight that the traditional insolvency mechanism is ill-suited to address the challenges of real estate insolvency.

Court did not adequately discuss the provisions of the IBC to determine whether the spectrum license can be considered an asset and can be treated under the IBC.

The judgment of the Supreme Court has provided doctrinal clarity on the vexed issue of the treatment of spectrum under the IBC, but this clarity has come at a considerable cost.

The Aircrafts Objects Act safeguards the rights of global lessors without eroding the resilience of airline companies to revive under the IBC 2016.

While the CLRP framework presents itself an progressive endeavor to introduce flexibility and efficiency into the insolvency regime, its current form contains several flaws that go to the root of the matter, compromising its efficacy.

The new amendment brings changes that are certainly going to be effective for the IBC. However, we must also not overlook the on-ground problems that might be created due to the changes in the code.

It bears no further reiteration that a proceeding under Sections 241–242 cannot be stifled by the commencement of CIRP or the approval of a resolution plan.

The 2025 amendment is an attempt to draw a line in the murky sand between resolution and liquidation. Ideal value maximization lies not in how fast we close a company, but in how effectively we give it a chance to recover while it still can.

The 2025 amendment to Section 33 marks a significant and pragmatic shift in India’s insolvency regime by providing a structured "second life" for CIRP. However, its success hinges on fiduciary responsibility of creditors, and effective institutional capacity to implement the provision faithfully.

Section 32A of the IBC represents a regressive step in the evolution of corporate criminal liability in India.

Codifying project-wise CIRP and strengthening buyer-side safeguards will be crucial to realize the judgment’s protective intent.

The contradiction between moratorium theory and interest accrual practice represents more than a technical legal gap. With the IBC Amendment Bill 2025 currently pending before the Parliament, the opportunity for meaningful reform arises.

It is time for tax laws to stop dragging MSMEs back into the quicksand if insolvency is supposed to provide them with a new beginning.

The IBC amendment marks a significant step in India’s insolvency law. By introducing CIIRP, Parliament has signaled a shift towards even greater creditor empowerment and flexibility. CIIRP’s shorter timelines and creditor-led design mirror global best practices (akin to pre-packaged restructurings), potentially speeding up resolutions and preserving value.

The ‘nil’ payment paradox, starkly illustrated in the case of Vadraj Cement Limited, is more than just a procedural flaw; it is a fundamental breach of the very promise made by IBC upon its enactment, which is the revival of businesses and equitable treatment of all the stakeholders.

The NCLAT’s ruling, though doctrinally clear, exposes a structural vulnerability: the potential for disguised preferences routed through third parties. India’s insolvency regime must evolve beyond formalism.

IBC gets very few opportunities to realize its true objectives, that of revival of financially distressed entities and their continuity as a going concern. In order to prevent the IBC from turning into a debt-recovery tool, it is essential to re-evaluate the Bill in light of the principles upon which the IBC is premised.

The need of the hour is a legislative and administrative framework that balances conflicting objectives. India's dual objectives of preventing financial misconduct and creating an insolvency regime that is investment-friendly can only be fully supported by such an integrated approach.

The IBBI has realized the value of market-driven resolution which it has effectively pivoted towards. The timing of the notification of these amendments must also be appreciated. India is notoriously a slow insolvency jurisdiction, and such perceptions can seriously damage credit availability in markets.

The pre-pack insolvency framework was crafted with the best of intentions. It aimed to protect MSMEs from the procedural weight of CIRP while ensuring that their businesses could be salvaged quickly and quietly. But in practice, it remains a tool too complex, too exclusive, and too disconnected from how MSMEs actually function.

[ Apeksha is a student at National University of Study and Research in Law. ] The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 ( IBC ) was...

The proposal, if accepted, will provide a fillip to exploring mediation in other aspects of insolvency. While insolvency mediation is an intricate issue, proactive proposals will facilitate stakeholder dialogue and aid in resolving inconsistencies.

The IBBI’s 2025 amendments significantly improve India’s insolvency framework by making it more aligned with global best practices.