Miss Lucy
← All judgments

The Assistant Commissioner vs Avishek Gupta Rp M/S. Sps Metal Cast & ...

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal26 November 2021

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal reasoned that a claim filed more than a year after the last date for receipt of claims, without satisfactory explanation for the delay, does not warrant appellate interference with the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of that claim; on that basis the appeal against rejection of a belated claim in insolvency proceedings was dismissed.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 869 of 2021IN THE MATTER OF:

The Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, CGST & CX ...Appellant

Versus

Avishek Gupta Resolution Professional ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Vaibhav Joshi, Advocate. For Respondent: Mr. Arik Banerjee, Mr. Abhishek Sikdar, Advocates with Mr. Avishek Gupta, RP in person.

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

26.11.2021: This Appeal has been filed under Section 61 challenging the

order dated 08.07.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National

Company Law Tribunal) Kolkata Bench, Kolkata. The Appellant's claim has

been rejected by the Resolution Professional and thereafter Application was

filed by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Tax, CGST & CX before the

Adjudicating Authority, which Application too has been rejected by the

impugned order.

2. The Learned Adjudicating Authority has noted that the last date of

receipt of claim was 11.07.2019 and in the Application filed by the Applicant

it has been stated that they came to know about CIRP proceeding on

19.01.2020 but they have filed the claim on 22.02.2021 i.e. after more than

one year. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that it was duty of the

Resolution Professional to see all records and notice the claim. 2

3. The only question that needs consideration in the present Appeal is

whether the Adjudicating Authority committed error in rejecting the

Application filed by the Appellant.

4. There being gross delay in filing the claim by the Appellant, we see no

reason to entertain this Appeal. There is no error committed by the

Adjudicating Authority in rejecting the claim of the Appellant. Appeal is

dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Justice Jarat Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) Archana/nn.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 869 of 2021

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free