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 + HC Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2017 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (9) TMI 256 - HC - Insolvency and Bankruptcy


Issues:
1. Amendment of cut-off date in the scheme sanctioned by BIFR
2. Extension of the period of rehabilitation
3. Applicability of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to sanctioned schemes

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought to amend the cut-off date in the scheme sanctioned by the BIFR from 31.03.2010 to 31.03.2012. The counsel for the petitioner highlighted that post the dissolution of BIFR and AAIFR, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 came into effect. It was emphasized that the scheme sanctioned by the BIFR continued to be binding even after the repeal of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003.

2. Additionally, the petitioner requested an extension of the rehabilitation period from 31.03.2018 to 31.03.2020, without altering the terms and conditions of the scheme approved by the BIFR. The counsel pointed out that with the dissolution of BIFR and AAIFR, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) became the adjudicating authority for insolvent companies. Furthermore, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs issued an order on 24.05.2017, providing clarifications and amendments regarding schemes sanctioned under the SICA.

3. It was argued that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 would now apply to sanctioned schemes, including the one pertaining to the petitioner's company. Considering the clarifications issued by the Government and the empowerment of NCLT to approve resolution plans for companies with sanctioned schemes, the court found no necessity for further orders on the petition. The petition was disposed of, with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the NCLT (Calcutta) if needed for any future actions related to the matter.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates