https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446628 NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging rejection of CIRP initiation under Section 7 IBC. Appellant provided Rs.25 crore financial assistance to respondent via ICD for land purchase in joint real estate project under JVA. Tribunal held JVA and ICD were interdependent agreements creating reciprocal obligations between development partners sharing profits/losses. Transaction constituted investment for profit rather than disbursement for time value of money, thus not qualifying as financial debt under Section 5(8) IBC. Appellant lacked status as financial creditor under Section 5(7), making Section 7 application unmaintainable. NCLAT upheld adjudicating authority's finding that IBC provisions cannot be misused for debt recovery purposes. en-us Wed, 06 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Dec 2023 12:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446628 NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging rejection of CIRP initiation under Section 7 IBC. Appellant provided Rs.25 crore financial assistance to respondent via ICD for land purchase in joint real estate project under JVA. Tribunal held JVA and ICD were interdependent agreements creating reciprocal obligations between development partners sharing profits/losses. Transaction constituted investment for profit rather than disbursement for time value of money, thus not qualifying as financial debt under Section 5(8) IBC. Appellant lacked status as financial creditor under Section 5(7), making Section 7 application unmaintainable. NCLAT upheld adjudicating authority's finding that IBC provisions cannot be misused for debt recovery purposes. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 06 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446628