There is no look back period specified under Section 66 of IBC, which refers to Fraudulent Transactions and unless the Liquidator scrutinises the documents, he would not be able to finalise or conclude whether the transaction also falls under Sections 43 or 46 of the Code – Amardeep Singh Bhatia Vs. Abhishek Nagori Liquidator for Asian Natural Resources (India) Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT held that in the Section 43, 45 and 46 of IBC, though the relevant time is provided for under the Code, the fact remains that unless the Liquidator, scrutinises and peruses the material which is relevant, to determine whether the Preferential Transactions or Undervalued Transactions took place at the relevant time, he cannot come to a conclusion as to whether these transactions took place during the relevant time. There is no look back period specified under Section 66, which refers to Fraudulent Transactions. If the Liquidator finds that there is a fraud committed by the Corporate Debtor at any time, he can approach the Adjudicating Authority and file an Application seeking necessary directions.

Related Posts:

If any Public depositor applies showing due of the debt claiming itself as operational creditor and the Resolution Professional or the Tribunal do not accept the claim on the ground that they are not financial creditor, we allow the appellant to raise the question before the Tribunal and if any adverse decision is given by the Tribunal, it will be open to the appellant to raise the issue before NCLAT- Hind Motors India Ltd. Vs. Adjudicating Authority NCLT, Chandigarh – NCLAT New Delhi

IBC-Case Laws-NCLAT
Scroll to Top