Anshul Gupta, an insolvency professional, faced suspension/cancellation proceedings initiated by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI). The IBBI issued a notice under Section 219 of the IBC directly, without a prior investigation report as mandated by Section 218. The appellant challenged this procedure, arguing that an investigation report is a prerequisite for exercising the power to suspend or cancel registration under Section 220(2) of the IBC. This contention was raised before the NCLAT but was overlooked.
Anshul Gupta, an insolvency professional, is facing proceedings for suspension or cancellation of registration.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) initiated these proceedings.
The IBBI did not appoint an investigating authority to submit a report as required by Section 218 of the IBC.
Instead, the IBBI directly issued a notice under Section 219 of the IBC to Anshul Gupta.
Anshul Gupta responded to the notice issued under Section 219.
Anshul Gupta contended that the power to suspend or cancel registration under Section 220(2) of the IBC could not be exercised without a prior investigation report.
This contention was raised before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) but was overlooked when rejecting an interim protection application.
…Sign in to view the parties.
An order for suspension was issued against the…
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal…
Anshul Gupta, an insolvency professional, faced suspension/cancellation proceedings initiated by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI). The IBBI issued a notice under Section 219 of the IBC directly, without a prior investigation report as mandated by Section 218. The appellant challenged this procedure, arguing that an investigation report is a prerequisite for exercising the power to suspend or cancel registration under Section 220(2) of the IBC. This contention was raised before the NCLAT but was overlooked.
Anshul Gupta, an insolvency professional, is facing proceedings for suspension or cancellation of registration.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) initiated these proceedings.
The IBBI did not appoint an investigating authority to submit a report as required by Section 218 of the IBC.
Instead, the IBBI directly issued a notice under Section 219 of the IBC to Anshul Gupta.
Anshul Gupta responded to the notice issued under Section 219.
Anshul Gupta contended that the power to suspend or cancel registration under Section 220(2) of the IBC could not be exercised without a prior investigation report.
This contention was raised before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) but was overlooked when rejecting an interim protection application.
…An order for suspension was issued against the…
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal…