Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :
        Insolvency and Bankruptcy

        2019 (10) TMI 1340 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Time Share Members reclassified as operational creditors, not financial creditors under Insolvency Code The Tribunal concluded that the Time Share Members were correctly reclassified as operational creditors by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) as ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Time Share Members reclassified as operational creditors, not financial creditors under Insolvency Code

                            The Tribunal concluded that the Time Share Members were correctly reclassified as operational creditors by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) as they did not meet the criteria to be classified as financial creditors under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The IRP's actions were found to be valid, and the Time Share Members were not entitled to attend or vote in Committee of Creditors meetings. The Applicant's requests for relief were denied, and the application was disposed of without costs.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Classification of creditors as financial or operational creditors.
                            2. Authority and actions of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP).
                            3. Rights of the creditors to attend and vote in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) meetings.
                            4. Validity of IRP's decisions and actions without CoC's concurrence.
                            5. Entitlement of Time Share Members to be classified as financial creditors.

                            Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Classification of Creditors as Financial or Operational Creditors:
                            The core issue revolves around whether the Time Share Members of Neesa Leisure Limited (NLL) should be classified as financial creditors or operational creditors. The Applicant argued that the IRP initially classified them as financial creditors, granting them representation and voting rights in the CoC. However, the IRP later reclassified them as operational creditors, which the Applicant contested.

                            According to Section 5(7) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IB Code), a financial creditor is one to whom a financial debt is owed, and Section 5(8) defines financial debt as a debt disbursed against the consideration for the time value of money. The Tribunal examined these definitions and concluded that the membership fees paid by the Time Share Members did not constitute a financial debt since it was a one-time payment for the use of NLL's properties and was non-refundable. The Tribunal referenced the case "Innoventive Industries Ltd. v. ICICI Bank and Ors." to emphasize that financial debt must involve consideration for the time value of money, which was not present in this case.

                            2. Authority and Actions of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP):
                            The Applicant contended that the IRP did not have the authority to unilaterally reclassify them from financial creditors to operational creditors without the CoC's concurrence and without informing or obtaining consent from the affected creditors. The IRP countered that the initial classification was provisional and subject to verification, as indicated in the First Report to the CoC.

                            The Tribunal found that the IRP acted within his rights to reclassify the creditors after further verification and legal consultation. The IRP's actions were deemed appropriate as the initial classification was provisional, and the IRP had communicated the need for further due diligence.

                            3. Rights of the Creditors to Attend and Vote in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) Meetings:
                            The Applicant sought a declaration that they and other similarly placed creditors should be allowed to attend and vote in CoC meetings. They argued that the IRP's decision to exclude them from the CoC was invalid and that any meetings or votes conducted without their participation should be declared void.

                            The Tribunal held that since the Time Share Members did not qualify as financial creditors, they were not entitled to attend or vote in the CoC meetings. The IRP's decision to exclude them was upheld as valid.

                            4. Validity of IRP's Decisions and Actions Without CoC's Concurrence:
                            The Applicant argued that the IRP's decisions to reclassify creditors and exclude them from CoC meetings were made without the CoC's concurrence and should therefore be invalid. The IRP maintained that his decisions were provisional and subject to verification.

                            The Tribunal determined that the IRP's actions were within his authority and did not require prior concurrence from the CoC. The IRP's provisional classification and subsequent reclassification were found to be appropriate and in line with the IB Code's provisions.

                            5. Entitlement of Time Share Members to be Classified as Financial Creditors:
                            The Applicant claimed that the money extended by the Time Share Members to NLL was a form of commercial borrowing, thus qualifying them as financial creditors. They provided various documents, including terms and conditions of the membership, balance sheets, and auditor reports, to support their claim.

                            The Tribunal reviewed these documents and concluded that the membership fees were non-refundable and did not involve consideration for the time value of money. Therefore, the Time Share Members did not meet the criteria for financial creditors under Section 5(8) of the IB Code. The Tribunal referenced the judgment in "Nikhil Mehta and Sons vs. AMR Infrastructure Limited" to support its interpretation of financial debt.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal concluded that the Applicant and other similarly placed creditors did not qualify as financial creditors and were correctly reclassified as operational creditors by the IRP. The IRP's actions were deemed valid and within his authority. Consequently, the Applicant's requests for declarations and relief were denied, and the application was disposed of with no costs.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found