TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 361
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the Applicant's claim as i) Financial Creditor as well as ii) Operational Creditor. It is the case of the Applicant that the Applicant seeks an order from this Tribunal, inter alia, challenging the decision of the Respondent, recorded in email dated 23.06.2021, rejecting the Applicant's claim as (i) Financial Creditor; and as well as (ii) Operational Creditor of the Corporate Debtor. 2. This Tribunal vide an order dated 22.04.2021, ordered the commencement of the liquidation process of Kalisma Steel Pvt. Ltd, Corporate Debtor (hereinafter known as 'Corporate Debtor'). Accordingly, the Respondent was appointed as the Liquidator. 3. The Applicant submits that since the Applicant Company is Registered with RoC Chennai, Tamil Nadu, it was not aware of the order of liquidation dated 22.04.2021, as passed by this Tribunal it became aware of the commencement of the liquidation process of the Corporate Debtor, only when it received email dated 19.06.2021 from one Mr. Modilal Pamecha, the valuer appointed by the Respondent. 4. The Applicant immediately upon receipt of email dated 19.06.2021, filed its claim before the Respondent on 22.06.2021. However, the Applicant was infor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., told the Applicant to reduce or not deduct the installment money. However, at no time, the Corporate Debtor has denied its liability to pay back the debt amount received from the Corporate Debtor. In fact the Corporate Debtor has in above mentioned emails, acknowledged the loan liability to pay back the debt in instalments which proves that the Applicant had advanced a loan amount to be paid back with interest. 11. The Applicant submits that he also had time and again places several purchase orders with the Corporate Debtor. The Applicant and the Corporate Debtor had mutually agreed, inter alia, that the Corporate Debtor was to bear the freight charges. 12. The Applicant further submits that Corporate Debtor has failed and neglected to repay amount due towards the principal outstanding and the interest. The Corporate Debtor has also not paid the freight charges due to the Applicant. 13. The Applicant submits that Corporate Debtor is liable to pay sum of Rs.1,70,64,572.31/- (Rupees One Crore Seventy Lakhs Sixty- Four Thousand Five Hundred Seventy-Two and Thirty-One Paisa Only); towards financial debt. A copy of proof of claim is annexed to Application as Annexure A-5. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s liable to pay to the Applicant sum of Rs. 73,21,933.19/- towards operational debt. 18. It is submitted that the transaction between the Applicant and Corporate Debtor was for the supply of goods and the Applicant has provided the details of the Operational Debt owed by the Corporate Debtor to the Application in the Interlocutory Application submitted by the Applicant, as Exhibits "A", "B", "D", to "J" provided by the Applicant in Annexure A-6 of the Interlocutory Application, which also includes the debit notes and the statement of accounts providing the total outstanding payable to the Applicant as an Operational Creditor. 19. The Respondent has failed to appreciate and verify the above-mentioned claims of the Applicant as Financial Creditor as well as the Operational Creditor. 20. Thus, the Applicant prays before this Tribunal to quash and set aside the communication dated 23.06.2021 and permit the submission as well as verification of the claims mentioned by the Applicant before the Respondent. 21. The Respondent submits that vide order dated 09.03.2021 this Tribunal in MA No. 1078 of 2020 filed by the then Resolution Professional (RP) Mr. Bhuta directed the commen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of the Promoters which is not an asset of the Corporate Debtor. The said shares are pledged by the Promoters in personal capacity. Secondly, it cannot be classified as Financial Debt as the said debt is in the nature of advance for the supply of goods. It is neither a Financial Debt nor Operational Debt. Moreover, the following documents which are the backbone of any Financial Debt under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 are missing. a) Loan Agreement b) Promissory Note c) Board Resolution of Corporate Debtor B. Claim as Operational Creditor in 'Form C' In relation to the Claim filed by the Applicant as Operational Creditor, the Liquidator proceeded to inform the Applicant that as per the Audited Books of Accounts of the Corporate Debtor, an amount is receivable from TVS Motors and hence TVS Motors is a Debtor and not a Creditor as claimed by the Applicant. The Liquidator then proceeded to inform the Applicant that both their Claims are not admitted and that Claims can only be admitted with the approval of this Tribunal. Accordingly, the Liquidator rejected the Claims as filed by the Applicant. 26. The Respondent has relied on The Deputy ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Resolution Plan, once submitted to Adjudicating Authority, after due compliance with procedural requirements stressed on the importance of adhering to the prescribed timelines, keeping in view the scope and objective of the Code. * In the Instant case the Resolution Plan was approved by 91.02% of the Members of CoC and is pending approval before the Adjudicating Authority and was last listed for hearing on 16.06.2021. The literal language of Section 12 mandates strict adherence to the time frame it lays down. Time and again, the Hon'ble Supreme court has noted that the model timelines provided in Regulation 40A of the CIRP Regulations should be followed as closely as possible. In this case, on account of lockdown and pandemic the last date was extended from 31.03.2020 to 16.08.2020 to facilitate all creditors to file their claims. In the background of this factual matrix, we hold that the delay/latches are on behalf of the Appellant and there is no dereliction of duty on behalf of the IRP/PR. * At the cost of repetition, we hold that the Resolution Professional was not duty bound to collate claims which are belatedly received after the last date thereby delaying t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Liquidator. 30. We have heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the records. It is noted that the Applicant being located out of the State was unaware of the order of liquidation dated 22.04.2021 as passed by the Tribunal, against the Corporate Debtor. The Applicant came to know of the commencement of liquidation process on 19.06.2021 from Mr. Modilal Pamecha, the valuer appointed by the Respondent. Therefore, the delay on part of the Applicant was unintentional and hence, this Bench hereby condones the delay, ordering the liquidator to consider the claims. 31. This Tribunal is of the opinion that as per the document annexed in Exhibit C by the Applicant, the Corporate Debtor admits that the Applicant has made an advance against supplies with the interest @12% for an amount of Rs. 2 Cr. This shows that there was clearly a relationship of Debtor and Creditor between the Corporate Debtor and Applicant. Hence, the claim of the Respondent that it is neither a financial debt nor an operational debt is erroneous. 32. This Tribunal relies upon the Supreme Court's Judgement in M/s Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. v. M/s Hitro Energy Solutions (P) Ltd., 2022 ....