2020 (10) TMI 537 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Condonation of delay in filing the requisite Form F under Regulation 9A - Liquidation Process - HELD THAT - It is evident that not only there has been a delay in lodging the claims with the Liquidator by the Applicant but in appealing against the decision of the Learned Liquidator there has been a delay on the part of the Applicant by more than 5 months in approaching this Tribunal. From the records of this Tribunal, it is evident that no Application seeking for condonation of delay of 5 months has also been filed before this Tribunal, as Section 42 has clearly laid-down, under which it is required of an Appeal to be filed within a period of 14 days from the decision of the Learned Liquidator. In view of the absence of any specific Application seeking for condonation of delay having been filed by the Applicant in approaching this Tribunal by way of an Appeal against the Order of rejection of its claim by the Liquidator beyond the prescribed period of 14 days and well settled principle that there is no equity about limitation , we are unable to entertain this Application/Appeal. In view of the IBC, 2016 being a time bound process as well as the Learned Liquidator being under a compulsion to complete the liquidation process within a period of one year from the date of commencement of liquidation, the application stands dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing Form F for proof of claim.
2. Amendment of section in appeal petition.
3. Liquidator's rejection of claim and delay in approaching the Tribunal for appeal.

Issue 1: Condonation of Delay in Filing Form F:
The Deputy Commissioner of Central Taxes filed an Application seeking to condone the delay in filing Form F for a claim of ?10,51,65,602. The Liquidator rejected the claim due to late submission after the specified deadline. The Applicant cited oversight as the reason for the delay. The Tribunal directed the Liquidator to provide a detailed counter and allowed the Applicant to make final submissions. However, the Applicant failed to file for condonation of the delay within the prescribed 14-day period after the Liquidator's decision, as required under Section 42 of the IBC, 2016. The Tribunal referred to the NCLAT decision emphasizing the time-bound nature of the liquidation process and dismissed the Application for condonation of delay, as no sufficient cause was presented.

Issue 2: Amendment of Section in Appeal Petition:
An Application was filed to amend the section in the appeal petition from Section 60(5) to Section 42 of the IBC, 2016. The Tribunal allowed the amendment, acknowledging the typographical error and clarifying that the original application was indeed filed under Section 42 of the IBC, 2016.

Issue 3: Liquidator's Rejection of Claim and Delay in Tribunal Approach:
The Liquidator rejected the claim due to late submission, prompting the Applicant to file an appeal before the Tribunal. However, the Applicant failed to approach the Tribunal within the prescribed 14-day period after the Liquidator's decision, as mandated by Section 42 of the IBC, 2016. The Tribunal, citing the time-bound nature of the liquidation process and the importance of adhering to statutory timelines, dismissed the appeal due to the absence of a specific application for condonation of the delay. The Tribunal emphasized the need to adhere to the statutory timelines and the principle that there is no equity about limitation, ultimately dismissing the appeal without costs.

This judgment highlights the importance of adhering to statutory timelines in the context of liquidation proceedings under the IBC, 2016. It underscores the significance of timely filing claims and appeals, emphasizing the time-bound nature of the liquidation process and the necessity of following the prescribed procedures diligently.