TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 928
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Amit Agarwal, Advocate for RP. Mr. Ankur Mittal and Ms. Preety Choudhary, Advocates for R-2/CoC Mr. Virender Ganda Sr. Advocate with Ms. Akansha Mathur and Mr. Asraf Belal, Advocates for R-4/ Objector JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN , J. This Appeal by a Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) has been filed challenging the Order dated 01.05.2024 passed in I.A. 961/2024 filed by the Resolution Professional (RP). The Adjudicating Authority allowed Prayer (c) of the Application, aggrieved by which Order, this Appeal has been filed. 2. Brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding the Appeal are: i. The Corporate Debtor, Mastana Foods Private Limited came to be admitted in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by Order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 5283/2022, i.e. Plan approval Application de-reserved the same. ix. By Order dated 01.05.2024, Adjudicating Authority disposed of the Application, I.A. 961/2024, allowing the Prayer (c), aggrieved by which Order this Appeal has been filed. 3. We have heard Learned Counsel Mr. Sumesh Dhawan appearing for the Appellant, Learned Counsel Mr. Ankur Mittal appearing for the CoC, Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Virender Ganda appearing for the Intervener, Learned Counsel Mr. Pankaj Agarwal appearing for R-1 and Learned Counsel Mr. Amit Agarwal appearing for the RP. 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Resolution Plan of the Appellant has been approved by the CoC with 100% votes and after the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed by the Adjudicating Authority, RP proposed to place an agenda before the CoC seeking its decision for future course of action, but on account of pendency of this Appeal, agenda could not be placed before the CoC. Counsel for the RP submits that it is the CoC which is empowered to take all decision regarding CIRP Process and CIRP Process is conducted under the CoC. Hence it is for the CoC to take a call with regard to further steps. It is submitted that there is no ground to interfere with the Impugned Order. 7. Learned Sr. Counsel Mr. Virender Ganda appearing for the Intervener/Unsuccessful Resolution Applicant submits that the clear intendment of the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was that a fresh CIRP process be conducted. It ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of the decision dated 6th September, 2022 in the case of State Tax Officer v. Rainbow Papers Limited, we set aside the impugned order dated 22nd March, 2022 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. It is obvious that these appeals will be governed by the directions issued in the said decision. The appeals are accordingly allowed on the above terms. Cause Title be amended accordingly. We grant 90 days' time to the substituted Resolution Professional to complete the entire process." 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above Order has referred to the directions issued in the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in `State Tax Officer' (Supra). The Judgment of `State Tax Officer' (Supra), where....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ved above, delay in filing a claim cannot be the sole ground for rejecting the claim. 59. The appeals are allowed. The impugned orders [Tourism Finance Corpn. of India Ltd. v. Rainbow Papers Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine NCLAT 910] , [STO v. Chandra Prakash Jain, 2020 SCC OnLine NCLAT 536] are set aside. The resolution plan approved by the CoC is also set aside. The resolution professional may consider a fresh resolution plan in the light of the observations made above. However, this judgment and order will not prevent the resolution applicant from submitting a plan in the light of the observations made above, making provisions for the dues of the statutory creditors like the appellant." 11. It was after the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted within 90 days and for taking steps in pursuance of the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 22.01.2024, I.A. was filed by the RP. Adjudicating Authority by the Impugned Order has allowed the Application in terms of Prayer (c) but has not issued any direction as to what process, RP has to conduct. The expression used is "conduct the ongoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process for M/s. Mastana Foods Private Limited". 13. Learned Counsel for the RP very fairly has submitted that RP has proposed an agenda to be placed before the CoC for taking a call regarding ongoing process. Learned Counsel for the RP has also relied on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of `M.K. Rajagopalan' Vs. `Dr. Periasamy Palani Goun....