# In the matter of Smart Timing Steel Ltd. Vs. National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. CA(AT)(Insolvency)No.04 of 2019

> NCLAT judgment dated 2019-11-13. Citation: TCN-2019-NCLAT-00144. The Appellant, Smart Timing Steel Ltd., filed an application under Section 9 of the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 13 Nov 2019
- **Citation:** TCN-2019-NCLAT-00144
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/smart-timing-steel-ltd-vs-national-steel-agro-industries-ltd-ca-c0c14f4b

## Summary

### Background

The Appellant, Smart Timing Steel Ltd., filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, Mumbai, rejected the application on October 31, 2018, because a copy of the certificate from the Financial institution reflecting non-payment of the operational debt was not filed. The Demand Notice was issued on December 23, 2016, demanding payment. The Operational Creditor filed a Petition 06/I&BP/NCLT/MAH/2017 before the Adjudicating Authority under Section 9. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the claim earlier on January 30, 2017, as the Operational Creditor

…

## Facts

Smart Timing Steel Ltd. (Operational Creditor) filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against National Steel & Agro Industries Ltd. (Corporate Debtor). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench, rejected the application on October 31, 2018, because the Operational Creditor did not file a copy of the certificate from the Financial institution reflecting non-payment of the operational debt. A Demand Notice was issued on December 23, 2016, demanding payment. The Operational Creditor had previously filed a Petition 06/I&BP/NCLT/MAH/2017 before the Adjudicating Authority under Section 9. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the claim on

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority was correct in rejecting the application filed by the …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority can reject an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency

…

**Reasoning:** The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application because the Operational Creditor

…

**Interpretation:** Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, outlines the procedure

…

**Application:** In this case, the Operational Creditor's failure to provide the required

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…; A.I.S. C…; +2 more
- **Appellants:** Smart Timing…
- **Respondents:** National Steel &…
- **Advocates:** Sanjay G…; Shivlal…; +3 more

## Timeline

- **2016-12-23 — Demand Notice…**: Demand Notice was issued demanding payment of the amounts involved in default to the…
- **2017-01-30 — Claim Rej…**: The Adjudicating Authority rejected the claim because the Operational Creditor was unable…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 3(14) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-3)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/smart-timing-steel-ltd-vs-national-steel-agro-industries-ltd-ca-c0c14f4b