The case involves an application filed by the Liquidator of Shirt Company (India) Private Limited under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunals Rules, 2016. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against the Corporate Debtor on 26.02.2020. The applicant sought reliefs including restraining Respondent No. 2 (Regional Provident Fund Commissioner) from continuing proceedings related to EPFO dues, declaring that orders passed by the Respondents regarding EPFO dues are not binding on the Applicant, and treating the Respondents' claim as per the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Code. The EPFO claimed priority over other debts, relying on the argument that the
…The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Shirt Company (India) Private Limited on 26.02.2020. Anuj Bajpai is the Liquidator. Respondent No. 1 filed a claim of Rs. 1,24,86,750/- during CIRP, which was admitted by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Committee of Creditors resolved to initiate liquidation, and an application was allowed on 22.12.2021. Respondent No. 1 stated that its claim was filed on 14.08.2020. Respondent No. 2 stated that the claim of Respondent No. 1 should be given priority and not be part of the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Code. The Applicant stated that since the Corporate Debtor did not maintain a separate fund for Pension and Provident Fund, the claim should be treated under the
…Sign in to view the parties.
Company Petition admitted under Section 9 of…
Respondent No. 1 filed its claim before the IRP…
The case involves an application filed by the Liquidator of Shirt Company (India) Private Limited under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunals Rules, 2016. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against the Corporate Debtor on 26.02.2020. The applicant sought reliefs including restraining Respondent No. 2 (Regional Provident Fund Commissioner) from continuing proceedings related to EPFO dues, declaring that orders passed by the Respondents regarding EPFO dues are not binding on the Applicant, and treating the Respondents' claim as per the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Code. The EPFO claimed priority over other debts, relying on the argument that the
…The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Shirt Company (India) Private Limited on 26.02.2020. Anuj Bajpai is the Liquidator. Respondent No. 1 filed a claim of Rs. 1,24,86,750/- during CIRP, which was admitted by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The Committee of Creditors resolved to initiate liquidation, and an application was allowed on 22.12.2021. Respondent No. 1 stated that its claim was filed on 14.08.2020. Respondent No. 2 stated that the claim of Respondent No. 1 should be given priority and not be part of the waterfall mechanism under Section 53 of the Code. The Applicant stated that since the Corporate Debtor did not maintain a separate fund for Pension and Provident Fund, the claim should be treated under the
…Company Petition admitted under Section 9 of…
Respondent No. 1 filed its claim before the IRP…