In a significant ruling having widespread ramifications, the Hon’ble Supreme Court (Court) on 14 August 2018 pronounced its judgment in the case of State of Bank of India v V. Ramakrishnan & Anr (Civil Appeal No. 3595 of 2018). The Court held that the period of moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) would not apply to the personal guarantors of a corporate debtor. Factual Background |
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (‘Code’) aims for resolution of insolvency as opposed to liquidation. The law was framed with the intention to expedite and simplify the process of insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings in India ensuring fair negotiations between opposite parties and encouraging revival of the company by formulation of a resolution plan.
It is timely, with further reform of the new Indian Bankruptcy Code (IBC) in prospect, to outline our thoughts on some of the current issues on which various market participants have requested an understanding of the approach and learnings of overseas practitioners.
The word “Dispute” is significant for the maintainability of every application filed under Section 9 of the IB Code. It will be not wrong to say that the first acid test for an admission of an application under Section 9 is prima facie
In the recent case of Commissioner v Mahindra and Mahindra Limited (Judgment) [Civil Appeal Nos. 6949-6950 of 2004], a division bench of the Supreme Court of India (SC) has ruled that waiver of principal portion of loan (which was taken for capital account transaction) by a creditor is not taxable in borrower’s hands under section 28(iv) or section 41(1) of the Income-tax Act 1961 (Act). Taxability of loan waiver has been a matter of debate and the relevant provisions under normal income-tax computation provide as under: |
TIME LIMIT FOR RECTIFICATION AND ADMISSION IS DIRECTORY
It is pertinent to note thatSection 9 (5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 provides the time limit for admission and rejection of the application and also the time limit for rectification of the defect in the application:
SECTION 9(5)
TIME LIMIT FOR RECTIFICATION AND ADMISSION IS DIRECTORY
It is pertinent to note that Section 9 (5) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 provides the time limit for admission and rejection of the application and also the time limit for rectification of the defect in the application:
SECTION 9(5)
“Section 9 (5) – The Adjudicating Authority shall, within fourteen days of the receipt of the application under sub-section (2), by an order—
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India has amended the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Fast Track Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2017 with effect from February 7, 2018, and has brought into force the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Fast Track Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2018[1]. The salient features of the new regulations have been discussed hereunder.
Appointment of registered valuers
It is known that I & B Code came into effect from 01.12.2016. Subsequently, it perspired during various proceedings in NCLT that it has no specific provision for limitation period and/or categorical applicability of Limitation Act on initiation of insolvency process under the Act.
However, the limitation period is prescribed under the Limitation Act for every suit instituted, appeal preferred, and application made under the law.
A bench of Supreme Court comprising of Justice R.F. Nariman and Justice Sanjay Kishen Kaul in the case of M.D. Frozen Foods Exports Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. Vs Hero Fincorp Ltd., in Civil Appeal No. 15147 of 2017 dealt with the issue that whether an NBFC is entitled to initiate proceedings under SARFAESI Act and arbitration proceedings, simultaneously, with respect to a loan account.