9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 506X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in filing claim before the Resolution Professional; and to direct the Resolution Professional to admit the claim of the Applicant. 2. Brief facts of the case, as mentioned in the Application and as per records of the Case, which are relevant to the issue in question, are as follows: (1) The main Company Petition bearing C.P. (IB)No. 220/BB/2018 filed by M/s. Phoenix ARC Private Limited (Petitioner/Financial Creditor), U/s. 7 of IBC, 2016 R/w Rule 4 of the I&B (AAA) Rules, 2016, by inter alia seeking to initiate CIRP in respect of M/s. Base Corporation Limited (Respondent/Corporate Debtor), was admitted by this Adjudicating Authority, vide its Order dated 02.08.2019 by initiating CIRP; appointing Shri Aashish Gupta, as IRP; imposing mora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Adjudicating Authority vide its Order dated 14.01.2020. (2) It is stated that the Respondent was carrying on its business activities within the State of Odisha. Initially, it got itself registered within the jurisdiction of the Registering Authority of Cuttack under the erstwhile Orissa Sale Tax Act, 1947 and subsequently the said registration has been migrated to the Odisha Value Added Tax Act and ultimately to the Goods & Services Tax (GST). The business activities of the Applicant within the State of Odisha has been provisionally assessed vide Order of assessment dated 18.02.2019 and 01.06.2019 passed under rule 12(1)(b) of CST (O) Rules, 1957 for the tax periods 01.07.2013 to 31.03.2014 and 01.10.2014 to 31.03.2015 respectively, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent, yet he could not submit the claim within the time fixed in the public announcement. Immediately, after coming to know about the initiation of CIRP, the Applicant submitted its claim in Form-A on 12.05.2020. Thereafter, the RP without considering the matter in its proper perspective, rejected to consider the claim submitted by the Applicant vide email dated 28.05.2020 on the ground that the prescribed timeline for submission of the claim has already expired. (4) As per the provisions of Regulations 12(2) of the IBBI (IRP for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, proof of claim may be submitted on or before the ninetieth day of the Insolvency Commencement date. In the instant case, the insolvency commencement date being 02.08.2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8. (6) In pursuant to the amendment of Section 31(1) of the IBC vide IBC (Amendment) Act, 2019 with effect from 16.08.2019 that the approved Resolution Plan has been made binding on the Government Authorities in relation to statutory dues and rights of such Government Authorities was made subject to the approve Resolution Plan. Since this Amendment takes away substantive right of the Government Authorities in relation to statutory dues, it is prospective in nature. The present operational debt due to the Applicant from the Corporate Debtor arises out of the Order of assessment dated 18.02.2019 and 01.06.2019 passed under Rule 12 (1) (b) of CST (O) Rules, 1957 thereby raising a tax and interest demand of Rs. 9,09,087/-. As such the present ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Applicant. 4. As stated supra, the material facts of the case are not in dispute with regard to the initiation of CIRP and for further proceedings. After admission of the case, the IRP has issued the Public Announcement dated 06.09.2019, which was published on 07.09.2019 in Newspapers viz., Financial Express (All India, English Edition), Himachal Times, (Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, Hindi Edition), Makkalkural (Chennai, Tamil Edition) & Hosadigantha (Bengaluru, Kannada Edition) inviting claims as per Section 15 of the IBC read with Regulation 6 of CIRP. The said public announcement was also posted on the website of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India and Corporate Debtor. In terms of the Regulation 13(2)(d) and 17(1) of the Code of IBBI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot justified for the delay. 6. It is settled position of laws that Court/Tribunal cannot reject a meritorious claim at the threshold, on the ground of delay and laches, provided a litigant has substantiated reasons for delay. In the instant case, the Applicant is an Operational Creditor, and the record shows that admitted claims made by the Financial Creditors of CD were amounting to hundreds of Crores. In terms of Code and the Rules made thereunder, the Secured Financial Creditors are entitled for prior consideration in the matter of settlement of their claims in Resolution Plan as well as in the Liquidation Proceedings. And the Operational Creditors hardly have any say on the question of settlement of their claims. As per the report subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
