14/10/2022

There is no provision under IBC 2016 to come out of the Liquidation Process once a liquidation is ordered – Jayashree Mohan Erstwhile Director of Corporate Debtor Vs. Pathukasahasram Raghunathan Raman Liquidator M/s. RA-NI Precast Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chennai Bench

The Adjudicating Authority held that the provisions of the IBC, 2016 treat CIRP and Liquidation Process as two separate stages and the procedures to be followed in each stage have been delineated by way of framing a separate regulation by the regulator. There is no provision under IBC 2016 to come out of the liquidation process once a liquidation is ordered, except by way of a Scheme under Section 230 of the Companies Act, 2013 or by Sale as a going concern and the provisions of IBC never envisaged for termination of liquidation process and as such the prayer sought by the Applicant transcends beyond the scope of IBC.

There is no provision under IBC 2016 to come out of the Liquidation Process once a liquidation is ordered – Jayashree Mohan Erstwhile Director of Corporate Debtor Vs. Pathukasahasram Raghunathan Raman Liquidator M/s. RA-NI Precast Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chennai Bench Read Post »

Where moratorium has been imposed on the assets of the corporate debtor under the Code, no action can be taken against its assets under any other statute by virtue of section 238 of the Code – Mr. Abhilash Lal, RP of Sevenhills Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Office of Collector, Mumbai – NCLT Amaravati Bench

The counsel for the applicant relies on a judgment of NCLT, Kolkata in Ram Ratan Modi (RP of Duncans Industries Ltd.) Vs. ICICI Bank (Darjeeling Branch) (2021) ibclaw.in 71 NCLT, wherein it was held that section 238 of the Code makes it clear that the provision of the Code will override other laws. Moreover, upon enactment of the code, several statutes were amended to the effect, Income Tax Act, 1962, being one of them, was amended vide third schedule of the Code. Therefore, in such a scenario, where moratorium has been imposed on the assets of the corporate debtor under the Code and no action can be taken against its assets under any other statute by virtue of section 238 of the Code, and the claims of the authorities having already been admitted by the Applicant, not de-freezing the account of corporate debtor would not only be antithetical to the Code but also averse to the principle of equity.

Where moratorium has been imposed on the assets of the corporate debtor under the Code, no action can be taken against its assets under any other statute by virtue of section 238 of the Code – Mr. Abhilash Lal, RP of Sevenhills Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Office of Collector, Mumbai – NCLT Amaravati Bench Read Post »

NCLT dismisses Section 9 CIRP application since the Operational Creditor is unable to provide properly raised Tax invoices to support their claim – S N Engineers Vs. Vedant Dyestuffs Intermediaries Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

In this case, the Corporate Debtor does not deny the work done nor refutes the existence of Proforma Invoices but declines to pay as no Tax Invoices were raised for the said work. Other discrepancies in the Proforma invoices related to absence of stamps and signatures on the invoices were also raised by the Corporate Debtor in their Reply to the Demand Notice. NCLT held that these issues require further consideration by a competent court and have to be dealt with accordingly. Therefore, in our view, there is insufficient evidence to prove the existence of operational debt since the Operational Creditor is unable to provide properly raised Tax invoices to support their claim. In view of the above reasons, the present Company Petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly the same is dismissed.

NCLT dismisses Section 9 CIRP application since the Operational Creditor is unable to provide properly raised Tax invoices to support their claim – S N Engineers Vs. Vedant Dyestuffs Intermediaries Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Income Tax liability on notional income arising on implementation of the Resolution Plan due to writing back of the unpaid dues to the creditors in the books of Corporate Debtor is to be waived off – Taguda Pte. Ltd. Vs. Subodh Kumar Agrawal, RP of Ushdev International Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench

The Adjudicating Authority held that this bench is of the view that the income tax liability on notional income arising on implementation of the Resolution Plan due to writing back of the unpaid dues to the creditors in the books of Corporate Debtor is to be waived off. Accordingly, such liabilities are waived off. Further, the Applicant is provided 6-month time after the Closing Date in order to assess the status of the permits, approvals and consents that may have lapsed, expired, suspended, cancelled, revoked or terminated and to ensure that the Corporate Debtor is compliant with them without initiating any investigations, actions or proceedings by the Government Authorities in relation to the non-compliances for the period till Closing Date.

Income Tax liability on notional income arising on implementation of the Resolution Plan due to writing back of the unpaid dues to the creditors in the books of Corporate Debtor is to be waived off – Taguda Pte. Ltd. Vs. Subodh Kumar Agrawal, RP of Ushdev International Ltd. – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

In the absence of any order from Adjudicating Authority appointing a liquidator, the applicant’s continuation as a RP is not in contravention of any provisions of IBC – Mr. Sameer Rastogi erstwhile RP Tara Chand Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rakesh Ahuja Liquidator of M/s. Tara Chand Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chandigarh Bench

The issues for adjudication in this case are:

(1) Whether the present application for the payment to the Resolution Professional for the period beyond what was expressly approved by the COC is maintainable; and

(2) Who will decide the fees, if any, due to applicant- erstwhile Resolution Professional as the COC has not been made a party to the application.

In the absence of any order from Adjudicating Authority appointing a liquidator, the applicant’s continuation as a RP is not in contravention of any provisions of IBC – Mr. Sameer Rastogi erstwhile RP Tara Chand Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Rakesh Ahuja Liquidator of M/s. Tara Chand Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. – NCLT Chandigarh Bench Read Post »

Disbursal against the consideration for time value of money remains an essential part even in respect of any of the transactions referred to in Section 5(8), sub-sections (a) to (h) – Nikhil Gandhi Vs. Sudip Bhattacharya RP of Reliance Naval and Engineering Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

Disbursal against the consideration for time value of money remains an essential part even in respect of any of the transactions referred to in Section 5(8), sub-sections (a) to (h) – Nikhil Gandhi Vs. Sudip Bhattacharya RP of Reliance Naval and Engineering Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Scroll to Top