TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 438
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ber (Judicial) The Appellant, is a registered Resolution Professional, and the services thus rendered by him in the capacity of being the registered Resolution Professional is being exclusively governed by the provisions contained under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016. It is upon the consideration of the eligibility as contemplated under Regulation 4 of IBBI (Insolvency Professionals) Regulations, 2016, and upon being satisfied with the qualifications and experience as contemplated under Regulation 5, an individual is directed to be enrolled with the IBBI and is issued with a Certificate of Registration under Regulation 7, to act as an Insolvency Professional, after having been re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....11 of IBBI (IP) Regulations, in a manner as prescribed under the provisions of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Inspection and Investigation) Regulations, 2017. 4. The Appellant herein, being an Insolvency Professional, has been referred to by Ld. NCLT, Hyderabad to IBBI for investigation into the entire process of CIRP of M/s Viceroy Hotels and the acts of the Appellant therein by virtue of the directions given in para-53 of the impugned order dated 01.09.2021 passed on IA No.281/2019, as it was preferred in CP(IB) No.219/7/HDB/2017. 5. The instant Company Appeal at hand has been preferred by Appellant / Resolution Professional in his personal capacity, questioning the part of the impugned order which has been rendered again....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... applicants. Prima facie, it 22 looks like the entire CoC and Resolution Professional have bulldozed the entire resolution process to favour one resolution applicant who is apparently not eligible to submit the resolution plan under IBC and CIRP Regulations as stated supra. We also feel the resolution plan submitted by the CoC before the Adjudicating Authority has become a conditional resolution plan subject to the approval of RBI as Regulator of ARCs. As such, we are not inclined to consider such conditional resolution plan for resolution of the Corporate Debtor." 6. The grievance of the Appellant is that the findings, which have been recorded against the him in para-53 of the impugned order as above, regarding the alleged professional ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Hon'ble Apex Court, it modified the order to the effect that CoC will hear the RP before bringing the matter to the notice of IBBI. 8. The Appellant, while challenging the impugned order, has argued that the observations made by NCLAT in its order of 18.11.2019 in CA (AT) (Ins) No.633/2018 should not have been made the basis for referring his case to IBBI for investigation on the grounds that the said order of 18.11.2019 has already been challenged in Civil Appeal No.345/2020 before the Hon'ble Apex Court and has been reversed, by the order dated 24.01.2020. 9. Apart from it, he has made various other contentions, stating that Ld. Tribunal has made the allegations without referring to any documents, that M/s Tolaram could not be incl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er Section 10(2) of the SARFAESI Act and was given a backdoor entry by the doubtful actions taken by the Resolution Professional and that, the H3 bidder was selected as the Successful Resolution Applicant by the CoC, ignoring the H1 bidder which is unprecedented and against the objectives of the code. It further observed that this particular lapse of the Appellant is not an isolated incident, but a continuation of a series of acts which had been adversely commented upon by NCLAT in its judgement of 18.11.2019. 11. It is further noted that a proceeding under Regulation 11 of IBBI(IP) Regulations, 2016, was drawn against the present Appellant by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, by its disciplinary committee and final orders ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e penalty amount by a crossed demand draft payable in favour of the 'Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India'. The Board in turn shall deposit the penalty amount in the Consolidated Fund of India. 5.2.2 Mr. Koteswara Rao Karuchola shall not accept any new assignment as an IP till he deposits the monetary penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rs. One Lakh only) with the Board and produces evidence to the Board of such deposit." 13. Owing to the fact that the set of allegations that were levelled flowing from the order of 18.11.2019, and as reiterated in the impugned order of 01.09.2021, does not make the finding recorded in para 53 of the impugned order in any way to be malicious perverse or contrary to the records and since, in the in- ho....