TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 854
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, Advocates ORDER Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 132 of 2026 & Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 134 of 2026 These two Appeals have been filed against the same order dated 10/12/2023 passed in I.A/377(MP)2025 and I.A/378(MP)2025, filed by the Appellant respectively. 2. By the impugned order, the I.As, has been rejected and disposed of, aggrieved by which order, these Appeals have been filed. 3. Brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding the Appeals are, the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), against the Corporate debtor, Pushp Ratna Realty Pvt. Ltd commenced, in which Appellant had filed its claim in form 'C' as a Financial Creditor. 4. Appellant in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No 132 of 2026 has filed its claim on 03/06/2025....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 03/07/2020 to grant 15% interest to the unsecured loan by Mr. Ashok Jain, from 2019-20 onwards. 11. Ld. Counsel for Appellant, referring to the balance sheets, for the year 2019-20 submits that with regard to the Socrus Bio Scineces Ltd., there is no change in the amount of the previous year 2019 and that of 2020, but there is a change in the figure with respect to Jayshree Agnihotri and no amount was paid by the Jayshree Agnihotri in the relevant period. 12. It is submitted that the unilateral decision by Board of Directors headed by Shri Ashok Jain to grant 15% interest to promoters loan of Ashok Jain could not have been done. Loan by the Jayshree Agnihotri was also promoters loan, unsecured, which was entitled for the same intere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Section 31 of the IBC 2016." 16. Adjudicating Authority, after hearing the Parties, has rejected the Application returning the finding that Appellant has failed to establish any contractual or documentary basis evidencing entitlement to interest at the rate of 18%. 17. In Paragraph 12 of the judgement, following has been held. "12. Having regard to the foregoing discussion, this Adjudicating Authority is of the considered view that the Applicants has failed to establish any contractual or documentary basis evidencing entitlement to interest at the rate of 18% or at any rate whatsoever. The principle of equity among creditors, though recognized in Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (2019 SCC OnLine SC 73), does not o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ution Professional, which is as follows AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT/ RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL 5) That during the course of previous hearings, it has been vehemently argued on behalf of the Appellant that the differential amount in the balance of the Appellant in the Balance Sheet of F.Y. 2019-20 of the Corporate Debtor, despite admittedly there being no agreement to such effect, is nothing else but an interest component coming to around 5.5% per annum (on doing a reverse calculation working of the differential amount) being accorded to the Appellant. Without prejudice to the fact that no case beyond the pleadings could have been made out by the Appellant, it is humbly submitted that the said amounts are adjustments to....