This is an Application No. 2152/2022 filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), initially Ms. Shantanu T Ray and later Mr. Satish Kumar Gupta, of Bombay Rayon Fashions Limited (“Corporate Debtor”) under Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”). The application seeks directions for the detachment of bank accounts of the Corporate Debtor. The IRP included additional bank accounts in the application.
On 04/08/2022, an application (IA.2152/2022) was filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) of Bombay Rayon Fashions Limited, seeking the detachment of the corporate debtor's bank accounts. The EPFO had issued attachment orders on 06.06.2022, a day before the CIRP initiation date of 07.06.2022. The applicant argued that the attachment order preceded the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC. The application included details of numerous bank accounts held by the Corporate Debtor across various banks and locations. The EPFO did not file any reply to the application. The applicant relied on decisions of the NCLAT and the Supreme Court, which held that PF and ESI funds are not part of the Corporate Debtor's estate. The court noted the absence of specific details
…Sign in to view the parties.
EPFO issued attachment…
Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)…
This is an Application No. 2152/2022 filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP), initially Ms. Shantanu T Ray and later Mr. Satish Kumar Gupta, of Bombay Rayon Fashions Limited (“Corporate Debtor”) under Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”). The application seeks directions for the detachment of bank accounts of the Corporate Debtor. The IRP included additional bank accounts in the application.
On 04/08/2022, an application (IA.2152/2022) was filed by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) of Bombay Rayon Fashions Limited, seeking the detachment of the corporate debtor's bank accounts. The EPFO had issued attachment orders on 06.06.2022, a day before the CIRP initiation date of 07.06.2022. The applicant argued that the attachment order preceded the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC. The application included details of numerous bank accounts held by the Corporate Debtor across various banks and locations. The EPFO did not file any reply to the application. The applicant relied on decisions of the NCLAT and the Supreme Court, which held that PF and ESI funds are not part of the Corporate Debtor's estate. The court noted the absence of specific details
…EPFO issued attachment…
Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)…