Clear prima facie opinion requirement under complaint-handling rules; vague grievance communications are non-compliant and must be clarified.
Regulation 7 of the IBBI (Grievance and Complaint Handling Procedure) Regulations, 2017 requires the Board to form a prima facie opinion on a complaint within the prescribed time and communicate that determination clearly to the complainant. A vague communication stating only that appropriate action is being initiated does not reveal whether the complaint has been accepted or closed, and therefore does not satisfy the regulatory mandate or enable the complainant to seek review where needed. The communication was held non-compliant with Regulation 7, and the Board was directed to expedite its decision under Regulation 7(7) and communicate it to the complainant.
Issues: Whether the communication issued on the complaint complied with Regulation 7 of the IBBI (Grievance and Complaint Handling Procedure) Regulations, 2017, and whether the Board was required to communicate a clear prima facie opinion to the complainant.
Analysis: Regulation 7 requires the Board to form and communicate an opinion within the prescribed time as to whether a prima facie case exists. If no prima facie case exists, the complaint is to be closed and the complainant informed, with a review remedy available against that decision. A cryptic communication stating only that appropriate action is being initiated does not disclose whether the Board has formed an opinion in favour of or against the complainant, and therefore does not satisfy the mandate of the regulation. The Board must communicate its determination in clear terms so that the complainant knows the status of the complaint and, where necessary, can invoke the review process.
Conclusion: The communication was held not to be in compliance with Regulation 7, and the Board was directed to expedite its decision under Regulation 7(7) and communicate that decision to the petitioner.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
