CIRP plea filed u/s 9 during the moratorium period wasn’t maintainable as per provision of sec. 10A: NCLAT

  • Blog|News|Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code|
  • 3 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 7 July, 2022

Recent Posts

Blog, News, Income Tax

No TDS on Payments to Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for MSEs Referred in Section 10(46B) | CBDT

Blog

Assessee to Pursue Pending Proceedings Before Appellate Authority Instead of Filing Writ Petition | HC

Latest from Taxmann

moratorium period; NCLAT

Case Details: B. Sreekala v. Al Sadiq Sweets - [2022] 139 taxmann.com 501 (NCLAT-Chennai)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • M. Venugopal, Judicial Member & Kanthi Narahari, Technical Member
    • Avinash Krishnan Ravi, Sankar P. Pankcker & Jerin Asher Sojan, Advs. for the Appellant.
    • Maninder Singh, Sr. Adv., Vikram Kalra, B. Divakaran & Mrs. J. Parimalam, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the Respondent-operational creditor entered into an agreement with the corporate debtor for the export of cashew kernels. The corporate debtor raised a pro forma invoice to the respondent and was paid Rs. 1 lakh. The respondent issued a demand notice u/s 8 of the IBC demanding amount paid to the corporate debtor.

Thereafter, the respondent filed an application dated 16.09.2020 u/s 9 of the IBC for initiation of the CIRP against the corporate debtor. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) by impugned order admitted the said application holding that the corporate debtor was in default of debt due and payable and default was in excess of the minimum amount of Rs. 1 lakh rupees stipulated under section 4(1) of the IBC.

Thereafter, an appeal was made to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) against the order passed by the NCLT.

On an appeal, the appellant-promoter/director of the corporate debtor contended that the jurisdiction threshold to file an application under IBC was Rs. 1 crore and the same was notified by the CG in Notification No. S.O 1205 (E), dated 24.03.2020 issued under section 4 of the IBC.

Further, the appellant stated that when the date of default was after 25.03.2020, an application filed u/s 9 of the IBC would be barred by section 10A. Thus, it was found that the contract was terminated on 30.04.2020 and there was a dispute in regard to the contract for delivery of goods between the parties.

NCLAT Held

The NCLAT observed that the threshold limit u/s 10A for initiation of the CIRP was Rs. 1 Crore vide Notification dated 24.04.2020, but in the instant case, ‘Default’ claimed from corporate debtor was Rs. 1 Lakh and an ‘interest’ amount, which was denied by the corporate debtor.

The NCLAT held that under contract, the amount was due and payable on 25.04..2020, as per provision of Section 10A, an application filed by the operational creditor/respondent No. 1 u/s 9 was not maintainable as no application for initiation of CIRP of the corporate debtor would be filed for any default arising on or after 25.04.2020 for a period of six months or such further period not exceeding one year from such date as may be notified in this behalf etc.

Further, the NCLAT held that admitting the application and declaring a moratorium was clearly unsustainable in the eyes of law. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the NCLT in admitting section 9 application was to be set aside.

List of Cases Reviewed

    • Al Sadiq Sweets v. Krisenter Impex (P.) Ltd. [IBA/35/KOB/2020, dated 26-2-2021] (para 81) reversed.

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

«
»

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied