Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 25TH September To 1st October 2023

NCLAT When Claimant Fails To Substantiate Its Claim, No Error Committed By RP In Admitting Claim As Per Balance Sheet Of Corporate Debtor: NCLAT Delhi Case Title: Engineering Mazdoor Parishad Devas Through Its General Secretary v Teena Saraswat Pandey Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1200 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Shri Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has held that a Claimant is obliged to substantiate its claim, failing which, the Resolution Professional’s decision to admit the claim based on the balance sheet of the Corporate Debtor cannot be faulted. “It is the responsibility of the Claimant to bring all relevant record to substantiate the claim. The Resolution Professional having admitted the claim of Rs.96 lakhs and odd on the basis of balance sheet of the Corporate Debtor, no error can be said to have been committed by the Resolution Professional for accepting the claim of Rs. 96 lakhs and odd. The Adjudicating Authority also held that there are no documents filed to support the claim of the workmen.” NCLAT New Delhi Sets Aside NCLT Order : Liability Of Interest Accrued During Section 10A Period Not To Be Excluded Aside Case Title: Beetel Teletech Ltd. vs. Arcelia IT Services Pvt. Ltd. Case No.: Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1459 of 2022 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (“NCLAT”), Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member), has set aside an NCLT Order wherein it was held that the Corporate Debtor cannot claim the benefit of Section 10A of IBC since the default has been committed prior to the commencement of the excluded period under Section 10A of IBC. Further, the view that the liability of interest that accrued during the said period should not be computed for triggering CIRP is erroneous. As per Section 60 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 when a debtor makes a payment without specifying how it should be allocated, the creditor has the discretion to decide how to apply it to clear any remaining debts and the creditor can use it to its maximum advantage. NCLAT New Delhi: CIRP Application Barred By Time Should Be Rejected Even If No Defence Of Limitation Raised Case Title: Sheetal Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Shree Swastic Sales Corporation Pvt. Ltd. Case No.: Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 640 of 2023 The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (‘NCLAT’), Principal Bench, comprising of Shri Mahendra Khandelwal (Judicial Member) and Shri Rahul Bhatnagar (Technical Member) has held that an application under Section 7 of IBC which is barred by time has to be rejected by the Court even if no Defence of Limitation was raised. NCLT ‘Ordinary Course Of Business’ For Real Estate Industry Is Providing Construction Service, Doesn’t Include Entering Into Agreement For Investment In A Project: NCLT Delhi Case Title: Pallavi Joshi Bakhru v Universal Buildwell Private Limited. Case No.: Company Petition No. (IB)- 456(ND)/2018 The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), New Delhi Bench, comprising of Shri Ashok Kumar Bhardwaj (Judicial Member) and Shri L.N. Gupta (Technical Member), has held that the ‘ordinary course of business’ for a real estate industry would mean providing construction service. An agreement between two investors to invest into a project cannot be treated as an act done by them in an ‘Ordinary Course of Business’. “The term ‘Ordinary’ means normal, natural and something what happens in routine either everyday or in general or traditionally. The term ‘Course’ means procedure, series, chain, link or string. The term ‘Business’ refers to an organisation or enterprising entity engaged in commercial, industrial, or professional activities. The term ‘Business’ also refers to efforts and activities undertaken by individuals to produce and sell goods and services for profit.” NCLT Mumbai: Operational Creditors Must File GST Liability Claims Under CIRP On Time As No Claim Can Be Admitted After Resolution Plan Approved By CoC Case Title: Abnco Vie Win Ent Private Limited vs. Steamline Industries Limited Case No.: CP(IB)No. 3784/MB/C-II/2018 The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Mumbai Bench comprising of Shri Kuldip Kumar Kareer (Judicial Member) and Shri Shyam Babu Gautam (Technical Member), dismissed an application filed by an operational creditor, seeking directions against the Resolution Professional make payment of GST liability of Rs. 60.34 Lakhs with the GST department and to file GSTR – 3B return for a stipulated tax period. The NCLT held that the RP had issued a public notice to inform all interested parties and stakeholders about the commencement of the CIRP. It highlighted that the Applicant failed to submit its claim within the stipulated timeframe as per Regulation 12(2) of...

Weekly Digest Of IBC Cases: 25TH September To 1st October 2023

Pallavi Mishra

Tags