AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 106
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reach of undertaking dated 20.05.2023 given by the Respondent. 2. Coming to the factual narrative and the chronological sequence of events, it is pertinent to notice that this Tribunal vide its order dated 21.04.2023 had allowed the Respondent to submit a full and final settlement proposal of dues in respect of all statutory creditors. This Tribunal while giving a chance to the Respondent to submit a settlement proposal had also categorically stated that the same was to be completed within a limited and stringent time frame. With this in mind a timeframe of only two weeks was allowed for submission of the settlement proposal. The Respondent failed to submit the proposal within two weeks and filed I.A. 1937/2023 before this Tribunal praying for two weeks extended timeline. This Tribunal while allowing extended period of 10 days categorically stated in its order dated 11.05.2023 that no application for further extension would be entertained. The Respondent thereafter submitted a settlement proposal on 20.05.2023 which was transmitted to the statutory creditors of the Corporate Debtor by the Liquidator. The Respondent along with their settlement proposal had also given an undertaki....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect. It has been contended that the Respondent is a habitual offender and has been willfully disobeying and circumventing the orders of this Tribunal on some pretext or the other. There was a willful breach of undertaking given by the Respondent to vacate the subject property at a time when their settlement proposal to the GST Department had been a non-starter on grounds of having been non-responsive. Emphasizing that proceedings under IBC are strictly timebound including the process of liquidation it was contended that delay in the liquidation process is proving detrimental to the interests of both the Corporate Debtor under liquidation as well as the statutory creditors. 4. It is the counter claim of the Respondent that it had sent an email to the Liquidator to enquire about the exact claim of the GST Department. Since this query remained unanswered by the Liquidator and there was need to ascertain the true and correct position of the dues of the Corporate Debtor in relation to the GST Department, there was some small delay in submitting a draft settlement proposal. Hence, an IA had been filed requesting for an extension of timeline for submission of full and final proposal fo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... present Respondent to settle with the fourth statutory creditor rather than straight away allow auction of the subject property with the caveat that this settlement was to be completed within a limited and stringent timeframe. This was allowed so as to balance the interests of all stakeholders while being fully conscious of the objectives of timeliness in the completion of proceedings under IBC. For easy referencing, we have extracted below the operative portion of the orders of this Tribunal of 21.04.2023 as hereunder: "33. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 22.02.2023 is set aside. The e-auction notice published by the liquidator in the newspapers and warrant of attachment of subject property is stayed. In the interim, the Appellant is allowed to settle all dues of the statutory creditors by complying to the following directions: (i) The Appellant will submit a full and final proposal for settlement of dues of all statutory creditors including for those statutory creditors where the dues have been settled. These proposals shall be submitted by the Appellant to the liquidator within two weeks of the uploading of this order. (ii) The liq....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ferent from the purpose for which time was allowed by this Tribunal towards full and final settlement. Instead of clearing the claims of the majority stakeholder, endeavours have only been made to dispute and stagger the claims by filing an appeal. Such conduct is indicative that the Respondent unscrupulously leveraged the earlier judgment of this Tribunal to file an appeal and by taking cover of this appeal to derail the liquidation process and avoid handing over of the subject property. Such a conduct is an anathema to the timely framework of liquidation proceedings under the IBC. In the process, the objectives of the IBC have been upset and defeated. Speed is the essence of IBC and the process of liquidation is time-bound to be completed within one year. Keeping in mind that the liquidation process in the instant case is already much delayed we do not find strong and cogent reasons to allow more time. 10. This brings us to the contention of the Respondent that the claims of the GST Department stand extinguished with the filing of the 7.5% pre-deposit amount. The Respondent has relied upon the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Chandra Sekhar Jha v. UoI & Anr. 2022 SCC ....