# In the matter of Intec India Limited

> NCLT judgment dated 2024-01-11. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLT-03164. The case involves an application (I.A. 4149/2023) filed in a Corporate Insolvency Resolution…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 11 Jan 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLT-03164
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/intec-india-limited-81ec9168

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an application (I.A. 4149/2023) filed in a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, seeking the defreezing of bank accounts belonging to the Corporate Debtor, M/s. Intec India Limited. The CIRP was initiated via Company Petition No. (IB) – 2432/(PB)/2019. The Resolution Professional (RP) discovered that the Corporate Debtor's bank accounts with ICICI Bank and Yes Bank were frozen due to orders from the Sales Tax Officer and execution proceedings, respectively. The RP requested the banks to defreeze the accounts to facilitate the CIRP.

## Facts

The Corporate Debtor, M/s. Intec India Limited, is undergoing CIRP initiated via Company Petition No. (IB) – 2432/(PB)/2019. The Resolution Professional (RP), appointed after the CIRP commencement on 26.05.2023, discovered that the Corporate Debtor's bank accounts with ICICI Bank and Yes Bank were frozen. The ICICI Bank account was frozen by the Sales Tax Officer (Respondent No. 1) based on an order dated 18.06.2020. The Yes Bank account was attached on 31.05.2023, pursuant to execution proceedings related to Pearl International Tours and Travels Ltd. Vs Intec Capital Limited. The RP informed the banks about the CIRP and the moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC, requesting them to defreeze the accounts. The RP also filed an application before the Ld. ADJ-02 seeking

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the freezing of the Corporate Debtor's bank accounts by the Sales Tax Officer and Yes Bank …

**Ratio:** Section 14 of the IBC imposes a moratorium upon the commencement of CIRP, prohibiting the

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the objective of the moratorium is to protect the Corporate

…

**Interpretation:** Section 14 is interpreted to provide a protective shield to the corporate

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts by holding that the freezing of the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** SHRI. MAHENDRA…; RAHUL BHA…
- **Appellants:** B. A. Chandrasheka…
- **Respondents:** M/S. INTEC INDIA…; SALES TAX O…

## Timeline

- **2018-01-01 — Execution Petition No.…**: Execution Proceedings pending before the Ld. ADJ-02, South District, New Delhi in Exe Pet…
- **2020-06-18 — Order by Sales Tax…**: Order by Sales Tax Officer freezing the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/intec-india-limited-81ec9168