7 Aug 2026, 08:59 UTC32 viewsread 7 August 2026
Decoding Indian Tax Laws | Visit www.taxcode.in for SearchAI+, Deep Summary and more... https://t.me/taxcodein
Signed IBC Laws
Channel
IBC Laws
@ibclaws
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
2,454subscribers
-8 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001255159068 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @ibclaws |
| Created | 9 August 2018 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 25 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 7 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 25 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/ibclaws |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 25 Aug 2026, 03:08 | 2,454 | -2 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 15:47 | 2,456 | -3 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 04:12 | 2,459 | -6 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 19:18 | 2,465 | +2 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 19:34 | 2,463 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:17 | 2,462 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 19:51 | 2,462 | first reading |
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 6 August 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 1.08%
- avg views ÷ 2,454 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 26.4
- 20 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- —
- this channel exposes no reaction counts
- Posts in window
- 20
- of 20 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (6 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 529 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 20:17 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Recent posts
7 Aug 2026, 04:29 UTC57 viewsread 7 August 2026
DRT-Madurai: Whether a possession notice under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act can be sustained when the secured creditor fails to prove service, publication, and affixture in compliance with Rule 8(1) and (2) of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002? Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – Sections 13(2), 13(4), 17(1); Security Interest (Enf…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:29 UTC41 viewsread 7 August 2026
DRT-Chandigarh: Whether borrowers can challenge the auction held on 30.07.2025 in a pending Securitization Application originally filed against an earlier auction notice, after not filing a separate challenge within the limitation prescribed under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act? Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 – Sections 13(2), 13(4), 14, 17, 31(j)…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:28 UTC29 viewsread 7 August 2026
DRT-Chennai: Whether an ex parte order in a debt recovery proceeding can be set aside when the defendant alleges non-service of summons despite records showing due service and no sufficient cause for non-appearance within the timelines under Section 19(5) of the RDB Act? Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, Section 19(5) and Section 22(2)(g); SARFAESI Act, Section 13(4) – Application to set aside ex parte ord…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:28 UTC21 viewsread 7 August 2026
DRAT Mumbai: Whether an auction sale under the SARFAESI Act can be invalidated on grounds of alleged incorrect property description, inadequate valuation, and deposit of EMD on the next working day when the due date fell on a Sunday? Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Section 13(2); Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, Rules 8(6) and 9(1); Ge…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:28 UTC18 viewsread 7 August 2026
DRT-Visakhapatnam: Whether an auction sale under the SARFAESI Act can be sustained where the reserve price was fixed on the basis of an improper valuation report and the secured asset was sold at a throw away price? Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 Sections 13(2), 13(4), 13(8), 14, 17(1); Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 Rules 8(1), 8(2),…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:28 UTC15 viewsread 7 August 2026
DRT-Delhi: Whether sale deeds executed after service of demand notice and after attachment under Rule 16 of the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961 could confer valid rights on purchasers claiming through the certificate debtors? Income Tax Act, 1961, Second Schedule, Rules 2 and 16 – Appeal against order of Recovery Officer dismissing objections to attachment and sale of property – appellants claimed to be …
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:27 UTC15 viewsread 7 August 2026
High Court-Bombay: Whether the statutory first charge under Section 11(2) of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 prevails over the priority of a secured creditor under Section 26-E of the SARFAESI Act, 2002? Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, Sections 8-F, 11(2), 7-A, 7-Q and 14-B; Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement …
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:27 UTC17 viewsread 7 August 2026
Supreme Court: Whether a non-signatory shareholder who executed a Share Purchase Agreement pursuant to a Memorandum of Settlement can be treated as a veritable party bound by the arbitration clause in the Memorandum of Settlement? Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Sections 11 and 16 – non-signatory shareholder – veritable party – reference to arbitration – issue was whether a consultant-shareholder, not a sign…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:27 UTC16 viewsread 7 August 2026
Supreme Court: Whether a buyer dealing with a micro or small enterprise under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 can independently invoke arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for its claim against the MSME? Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006; Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — appeal raised the question whether a buyer of goods or servic…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:26 UTC15 viewsread 7 August 2026
NCLT-New Delhi Bench: Whether a Section 7 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is maintainable when financial debt and default are established and the Corporate Debtor, despite due service, remains ex parte? Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Sections 7, 14 and 60(1); Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 – Rule 4 – Section 7 admission – working capit…
Signed IBC Laws
7 Aug 2026, 04:26 UTC16 viewsread 7 August 2026
NCLT-Mumbai Bench: Whether joint financial creditors established the existence of financial debt and default under Sections 5(8) and 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 so as to warrant admission of a Section 7 application against the corporate debtor? Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Sections 5(8), 5(8)(a), 7, 14, 60(1), 3(11), 3(12), 5(7), 4; Limitation Act, 1963 – Article 137 – Joint financial cre…
Signed IBC Laws
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @ibclaws. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 594,527 of 1,603,376entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 25 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“IBC Laws” (@ibclaws), 2,454 subscribers as measured 25 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ibclaws.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.