TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Insolvency Application Rejected: Emphasizes Compliance with Statutory Requirements</h1> <h3>Calcutta Ispal Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/s Om Shakti Smelters Pvt. Ltd.</h3> Calcutta Ispal Pvt. Ltd. Versus M/s Om Shakti Smelters Pvt. Ltd. - Tmi Issues involved:Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process under Sec.9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 without compliance of statutory requirements.Detailed Analysis:1. Application under Sec.9 of I & B Code: The Applicant filed an application under Sec.9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for the initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process against the corporate debtor, citing an amount due of &8377; 77,00,000 based on a purchase order and default in supply of goods.2. Non-Compliance with Notice Requirement: The corporate debtor contended that the application was not maintainable as it was not preceded by a notice in Form 4 as required by the Adjudicating Authority Rules, 2016. The absence of a notice in Form 3 or 4 before filing the petition under the I & B Code was highlighted, emphasizing the importance of strict compliance with Sec. 8 of the Code.3. Mandatory Compliance with Sec.8 and Sec.9: The judgment emphasized the mandatory nature of complying with Sec.8 and Sec.9 of the I & B Code. It was noted that the petition was filed without issuing the demand notice as prescribed, and the application did not include the necessary documents such as an affidavit regarding the absence of a dispute notice and a certificate from financial institutions confirming non-payment of debt.4. NCLAT Precedent: Referring to a specific NCLAT case (Company Appeal 39 of 2017), the judgment reiterated the requirements under Sec.9, including the furnishing of specific documents along with the application. The judgment highlighted the mandatory nature of these requirements, emphasizing the word 'shall' in sub-section (3) of Sec.9.5. Rejection of Application: Due to the non-compliance with the statutory requirements of Sec.8 and Sec.9, the Tribunal rejected the application for initiating the corporate resolution process against the debtor. The order clarified that this rejection did not affect the petitioner's right to pursue the claimed amount through other legal provisions.In conclusion, the judgment focused on the importance of strict compliance with the statutory provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, particularly regarding the issuance of demand notices, submission of required documents, and adherence to procedural requirements. The rejection of the application underscored the significance of meeting these prerequisites for initiating the corporate insolvency resolution process.
TaxTMI 