# In the matter of Altair Industrial Technologies Private Limited

> NCLT judgment dated 2024-03-20. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLT-02006. The case involves an Interlocutory Application filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) of…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 20 Mar 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLT-02006
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/altair-industrial-technologies-private-limited-61a58604

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an Interlocutory Application filed by the Resolution Professional (RP) of Altair Industrial Technologies Private Limited, seeking directions from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) regarding preferential and fraudulent transactions. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced against the Corporate Debtor on February 26, 2019. The RP's application alleges that Respondents No. 1 and 3 engaged in preferential transactions by receiving payments from the Corporate Debtor in preference over other creditors. Additionally, Respondent No. 1 is accused of fraudulently withdrawing and misappropriating funds from the Corporate Debtor's account and removing assets from its registered office.

## Facts

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) commenced against Altair Industrial Technologies Private Limited on February 26, 2019. Mr. Sunil G. Nanal was initially appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), later replaced by Mr. Harshad S. Deshpande. The Committee of Creditors (CoC) consisted of Bank of India and SIDBI. The IRP appointed M/s. Kirtane Pandit LLP as Forensic Auditor. The Forensic Auditor's report revealed certain transactions between the Corporate Debtor and related parties, specifically Respondents No. 1 and 3. Respondent No. 1, Mr. Anoop Anand, is alleged to have withdrawn Rs. 1,99,26,112 from the Corporate Debtor's Kotak Mahindra Bank account during the CIRP period without authorization. Respondent No. 1 is also alleged to have

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the application filed by the Resolution Professional is barred by limitation under …

**Ratio:** Regulation 35A of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons)

…

**Reasoning:** The respondents argued that the application was filed beyond the 135-day period

…

**Interpretation:** Regulation 35A sets a strict timeline for the RP to identify and take action

…

**Application:** The respondents argued that the application was time-barred, but the NCLT

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Kuldip Kumar…; ANIL RAJ C…
- **Appellants:** Harshad S.…
- **Respondents:** Altair Industrial…; Anoop A…

## Timeline

- **2018-01-01 — CP (IB) No. 436…**: Filing of CP (IB) No.…
- **2019-02-26 — CIRP Commen…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP') commenced against the Corporate Debtor…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 43 — Preferential transactions and relevant time](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-43)

---

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/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/altair-industrial-technologies-private-limited-61a58604