Supreme Court to decide constitutional validity of provisions of IBC 2016 to the extent they apply to personal guarantors of corporate debtors
ABCAUS Case Law Citation
ABCAUS 3416 (2020) (10) SC
The Ministry of Corporate Affirs (MCA) by Notification dated 15.11.2019 had brought personal guarantors to corporate debtors under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Several Writ Petitions were filed in various High Courts challenging the said Notification and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority for Insolvency Resolution Process of Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Rules, 2019.
The Writ Petitioners also sought a declaration that Section 95, 96,99, 100, 101 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 are unconstitutional in so far as they apply to personal guarantors of corporate debtors.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India had filed the various Transfer Petitions under Article 139 (A) read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India seeking transfer of the Writ Petitions filed before various High Courts to Hon’ble Supreme Court to avoid the confusion caused by possible divergence of opinions expressed by the High Courts.
A Full Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court heard the matter and stated that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is at a nascent stage and it is better that the interpretation of the provisions of the Code is taken up by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to avoid any confusion, and to authoritatively settle the law.
Accordingly, the Apex Court directed the transfer of the Writ Petitions pending before the High Courts to it. The Registries of the High Courts were directed to transmit the records of the Writ Petitions forthwith.
It was further direct that no further Writ Petitions involving the challenge to the Notification dated 15.11.2019 by which Part III of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and other provisions in so far as they relate to personal guarantors to corporate debtors have been brought into force shall be entertained by any High Court. However any interim orders passed by the High Courts to continue.
Penalty u/s 270A deleted as assesse filed revised computation during scrutiny correcting the mistake which was noticed only after the…
Penalty u/s 271B for unfilled column 40 in Form 3CD related to details regarding turnover, gross profit etc. for previous…
Merely rectifying computation without amending assessment order without notice to assessee does not nullify the entire assessment - ITAT In…
Once assessee discharges primary onus of providing basic documents in support of the identity, genuineness and the creditworthiness it shifts…
CBDT has notified Cost Inflation Index for Financial Year / Tax Year 2026-27 CBDT has notified "384" as Cost Inflation…
Power of CIT(A) under section 251(1)(a) to remand case could be exercised only when the assessment is passed u/s 144…