TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....initiated against the corporate debtor, before the Hon'ble National company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), and Vide judgment dated 14.08.2020, the Hon'ble NCLAT allowed the said appeal and directed as under: "26. The Adjudicating Authority will fix the fee of 'Interim Resolution Professional' for the period he has functioned." * That the details of professional fees and expenses incurred by the IRP from March, 2020 to August, 2020 have been placed. 3. The Respondent has filed its reply and written arguments raising objections against the prayer of applicant, stating that: * Hon'ble NCLAT in its order dated 14.08.2020, has nowhere mentioned that the payment of the said fee will be made by the corporate debtor. * Further, it is stated that in terms of Regulation 33(3) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 (CIRP Regulations), the applicant is to bear expenses incurred by the IRP, which shall then be reimbursed by the CoC. Since in the present matter, CoC was not constituted and Hon'ble NCLAT has noted in its order that the initiation of CIRP was suffered from grave legal infir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(IBBI) was directed to directed to examine the matter and submit the report and accordingly, IBBI has filed the report and submitted as follows: * The (IBBI) committee found that the fees of Rs. 17,70,000/- as claimed by applicant is unreasonable. The committee considered that for the activities performed by applicant on a limited scale, a total fee of Rs. 2,00,000/- (calculated at Rs. 40,000/- per month) may be considered as reasonable. * The committee observed that the applicant has * made two announcements. First public announcement was made in March, 2020 at cost of Rs. 47,074/-, which covered 5 cities and 10 editions and the second was made in in April 2020 (at the cost of Rs. 48,646/-) covering 1 city and 2 editions. The committee did not find the cost incurred towards second public announcement as acceptable as the same was not necessary, given that the first public announcement was already made. * It is stated that the applicant appointed Pankaj Agarwal & Associates, Advocates and Solicitors for the purpose of claims' verification on 16.05.2020 and a bill No. APIL/NCLT-CD-2/07/2020-21 for an amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- was raised to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Creditor-in-class (allottees) of other projects of Corporate Debtor, were received by the Applicant, amounting to a sum of Rs. 1,255 Crore. Despite the insolvency being limited to two Projects of the Corporate Debtor, all kind of creditors had filed their claims. Several Creditors such as Banks and Financial Institutions, Debenture Holders, Decree-Holders, were not exclusive to any particular project and as a result, all of them filed their claims. Being the IRP, it was the Applicant's duty to collect and verify the every claim received by him. That the Committee has failed to consider the fact that the appointment of Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, Advocate, was made to obtain legal advice in verification of the Claims filed by Banks, which require legal assistance. Such appointment was required to discharge the responsibility cast upon the IRP. * The committee has erroneously recorded that the second public announcement was not necessary, given that the first public announcement was already made. It is stated that the first Public Announcement was made in Form A on 18.03.2020 after the commencement of CIRP. Thereafter, in the Appeal filed by the Management of the Corporate Debto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 11. The Learned Counsel appearing for the IBBI submitted that in pursuance of the direction, the IBBI had constituted a Committee to examine the cost and expenses claimed by the applicant and accordingly, the IBBI has submitted the report and the operative portion of the report has already been referred to Supra, therefore, it is needless to repeat the same. 12. Now in the light of submissions, we consider the prayer of the applicant. It is an admitted fact that the CIRP initiated against the respondent is set aside by the Hon'ble NCLAT in Company Appeal 80 (Insolvency No. 452/2020) and while disposing of the appeal the Hon'ble NCLAT in para 26 of the Judgment observed that "the Adjudicating Authority will fix the fee of IRP for the period he has functioned" and in pursuance of that direction, the present application is filed. 13. In terms of the Regulation 33 of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Person) Regulation 2016, cost of the Interim Resolution Professional shall be fixed by- "Regulation 33 - Costs of the interim resolution professional. (1) The applicant shall fix the expenses to be incurred on or by the interim resolut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0-21 for an amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- was raised to the applicant towards said claim verification. It is observed by the committee since claim verification is duty of IRP under the Code, it cannot be outsourced and hence, this claim of applicant is not acceptable as the same has been suitably factored while arriving at the fee payable to IRP. * It is submitted that the committee opined that Rs. 42,750/- claimed by applicant towards other expenses can be considered as acceptable. * In respect of cost of legal retainership, it is submitted that the applicant appointed Shohit Chaudhry & Associates, Advocates, as legal counsel for the given purpose on 15.05.2020 the appointment was confirmed on 26.05.2020. The appointment was made after two months gap from CIRP Commencement date. It is submitted that Bill of Rs. 6,00,000/- raised by advocates is not acceptable and fee of Rs. 3,00,000/- may be considered as acceptable keeping in view that the work performed by the advocate was limited for the period of two months only". 16. On the basis of this report, we notice that the IBBI has fixed the total fee of IRP of Rs. 2,00,000/-, @ 40,000/- per month and also allowed the ....