Income Tax Refund Received By Bank During CIRP In Corporate Debtor's Account Cannot Be Withheld: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that Income Tax Refund received by the bank in the corporate debtor's account during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) cannot be withheld on ground and such amount must be remitted to the liquidation bank account of the corporate debtor. Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process...

Secured Creditor Is Obligated To Contribute Towards Workmen's Dues When Security Interest Is Realised Under SARFAESI Act: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that the obligation to contribute towards workmen dues out of the realised fund cannot be avoided by the Secured Creditor when the security interest has been realised under the SARFAESI Act. Section 52(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) permits a secured creditor to realise its...

Application U/S 7 Of IBC Shall Be Deemed Withdrawn If Modification Application Is Not Filed Within 30 Days: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that failure to file a modification application under third proviso section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) within 30 days, from the date of commencement of the 2020 Amendment Act, to comply with the requirement of 100 allottees or 10% of the total unit holders shall result in the original application being...

Unadjusted Trade Advance Payable With Interest Rate Qualifies As Financial Debt U/S 5(8) Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that unadjusted trade advance carrying interest rate payable by the Corporate Debtor till the entire payment is made satisfies the requirement of consideration against time value of money under section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) therefore qualifies as a ...

Assets Of Corporate Debtor Attached Under PMLA Are Not Part Of Resolution Estate, NCLT Cannot Direct Release Even If Attached During CIRP: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that if property is alleged to be proceeds of crime and is under adjudication by a competent authority under a penal statutes, it cannot be considered part of the freely available resolution estate under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), therefore the Enforcement ...

NCLAT Declares Transactions Fraudulent U/S 66 Of IBC Due To Corporate Debtor's Failure To Diligently Negotiate One-Sided Clause In MOU

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan and Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) has held that a complete surrender on the part of the corporate debtor to negotiate the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, by which the property from the Respondent was to be purchased, and agreeing to a one side clause that empowers the Respondent to unilaterally terminate the agreement and...

Single Whatsapp Message Raising General Dispute Can't Become Foundation To Reject Petition U/S 9 Of IBC: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that a single WhatsApp message sent long ago cannot serve as the foundation to dispute an entire series of transactions, especially when no specific invoices—forming the foundation of the petition under Section 9 of the Code—have been contested. Therefore, the petition cannot be rejected...

Viability Of Corporate Debtor Can't Be Considered While Deciding Petition U/S 7 Of IBC Once Debt & Default Are Established: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) has held that an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 cannot be rejected solely on the ground that the corporate debtor is a viable entity and that initiating insolvency proceedings would adversely affect the stakeholders.The Adjudicating Authority has no discretion to consider whether the Application...

Limitation Period For Filing Application U/S 95 Of IBC Against Personal Guarantor Stands Extended By Acknowledgement Of Debt: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that the limitation period for filing an application under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“the Code”) by a creditor against a personal guarantor, stands extended upon a valid acknowledgment of debt made by the principal borrower. The Tribunal held that ...

Registration Of Security Interest With CERSAI Is Sufficient To Claim Status Of Secured Financial Creditor: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan and Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) has held that security interest can be proved through its registration with Central Registry of Securitisation Asset Reconstruction and Security Interest of India (CERSAI) and the financial creditor can be classified as a Secured Creditor based on such registration as per Regulation 21 of the...

Litigants Are Not Trained Advocates, Restoration Application Can't Be Dismissed Due To Counsel's Failure To Inform Of Proceedings: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Judicial Member), Mr. Naresh Salecha (Technical Member) and Mr. Indevar Pandey (Technical Member) has held that the restoration application under Rule 48(2) of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Rules, 2016 cannot be dismissed if the application is filed within 30 days from the date of dismissal of the original petition. In the present case, the petition under section 7 of the...

Mere Execution Of Restructuring Agreement Does Not Extinguish Corporate Debtor's Liability When Restructuring Scheme Is Not Approved By NCLT: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) has held that the mere signing of a Master Restructuring Agreement, wherein a third party undertakes to discharge the liabilities of the Corporate Debtor, does not result in the extinguishment of the Corporate Debtor's obligations if the restructuring subsequently fails. It cannot be presumed that liabilities have been transferred solely due...