# In the matter of Corporate Power Limited

> NCLT judgment dated 2025-07-24. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLT-01202. The case involves an application by Pankaj Dhanuka, the liquidator of Corporate Power Limited,…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 24 Jul 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLT-01202
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-kolkata/corporate-power-limited-a75bcb2f

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application by Pankaj Dhanuka, the liquidator of Corporate Power Limited, seeking permission to sell the corporate debtor as a going concern despite a provisional attachment order (PAO) issued by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). The ED had attached certain assets of the corporate debtor, claiming they were proceeds of crime. The liquidator argues that the attachment impedes the sale process and violates Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).

## Facts

The liquidator, Pankaj Dhanuka, filed an application seeking permission to sell Corporate Power Limited as a going concern.

The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) issued a Provisional Attachment Order (PAO) attaching certain assets of Corporate Power Limited under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

The ED also filed an original complaint before the PMLA Adjudicating Authority seeking confirmation of the PAO.

The PMLA Adjudicating Authority issued a Show Cause Notice and later confirmed the PAO.

The liquidator argues that the ED's attachment impedes the sale process and violates Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).

The ED contends that PMLA proceedings are distinct from IBC proceedings and that the attached properties are proceeds of crime.

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether an Attachment Order passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority under PMLA in exercise of its …

**Ratio:** The NCLT relies on several judgments, including Nitin Jain Liquidator PSL Limited vs.

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT reasons that the objective of the IBC is to maximize the value of assets and

…

**Interpretation:** The NCLT interprets Section 32A of the IBC to mean that once a resolution plan

…

**Application:** The NCLT applies these principles to the present case, allowing the liquidator

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** BIDISHA BA…; Cmde Siddharth…
- **Appellants:** Pankaj Dh…
- **Respondents:** Corporate Power…; The Deputy…; +1 more
- **Other parties:** Asset Reconstructi…; Anil K…; +1 more
- **Advocates:** Manju Bhu…; Anupam Pr…; +11 more

## Timeline

- **2025-07-24 — Date of Prono…**: Date on which the order…
- **2020-02-19 — CIRP Admi…**: CIRP was admitted in respect of the corporate…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-kolkata/corporate-power-limited-a75bcb2f