Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (8) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (8) TMI 69 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy


Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal
2. Dispute regarding debt amount and initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
3. Validity of application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

Analysis:
1. The judgment addressed the issue of condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Appellate Tribunal, after hearing both parties, was satisfied with the grounds presented and thus condoned the delay of six days in preferring the appeal. Consequently, I. A. No. 1837 of 2019 was disposed of.

2. The appeal was filed by the Director of a company against the order initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the company. The appellant argued that there was a dispute about the debt amount and that the Adjudicating Authority failed to consider certain aspects regarding the credit facility reduction and restructuring. However, the Tribunal noted that the account of the Corporate Debtor was declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) and various actions were taken due to default on payments. The Tribunal referred to the "Innoventive Industries Ltd. Vs. ICICI Bank" case, highlighting the broad definition of default under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Despite the dispute over the quantum of payment, the Tribunal upheld the admission of the application under Section 7 as the debt amount exceeded the threshold.

3. The Tribunal also addressed the validity of the application filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. It noted that the application was filed by an officer of the bank, dismissing the appellant's argument that it was not filed by an authorized person. The Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's grounds and subsequently dismissed the appeal without costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates