Information Utility under IBBI to verify before issuance of a record of default

Information Utility under IBBI to verify before issuance of a record of default. the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) (Amendment) Regulations, 2024.

INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY BOARD OF INDIA

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 13th August, 2024

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) (Amendment) Regulations, 2024 No. IBBI/2024-25/GN/REG114.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 196, 213, 214, 215 read with section 240 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (31 of 2016), the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India hereby makes the following regulations further to amend the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) Regulations, 2017, namely:-

1. (1) These Regulations may be called the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) (Amendment) Regulations, 2024.

(2) They shall come into force on 1st October 2024, except regulation 3 and 5 of these Regulations which shall come into force on 1st December 2024.

2. In the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) Regulations, 2017, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the principal regulations’), in regulation 21, in sub-regulation (2),

(i) in clause (a), for the words “the time specified in the Technical Standards”, the words, “seven days” shall be substituted.

(ii) in clause (b), for the words “three days”, the words, “seven days” shall be substituted.

3. In the principal regulations, in regulation 21,

(i) in sub-regulation (2), in clause (c), for sub-clause (iii), the following sub-clause, shall be substituted, namely:-

“(iii) submitted in Form C of the Schedule:

(A) by a financial creditor, which is a bank included in the second schedule of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934;

(B) by any other creditor, in respect of a debtor other than the corporate debtor as defined in section 3(8) of the Code.”

(ii) in sub-regulation (3), after Table 2, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely: –

“Provided further that in case of financial creditors which are banks included in the second schedule of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, when a debtor disputes a part of the default amount or such dispute is in respect of only non-financial information, then the information utility shall record the status of authentication as ‘authenticated’ in respect of the undisputed default amount.”

4. In the principal regulations, existing regulation 21A regarding “Dissemination of public announcement” shall be re-numbered as regulation 21B, and before regulation 21B so renumbered, the following regulation shall be inserted, namely: –

“21A. Verification of information before issuance of a record of default.

(1) An information utility shall verify the key details such as e-mail address of the debtor, document showing proof of debt, latest acknowledgment of debt by the debtor and proof of default before issuance of record of default in Form D of the Schedule under regulation 21.”

5. In the principal regulations, in the amended regulation 21A regarding ‘Verification of information before issuance of record of default’, after sub-regulation (1), the following sub-regulations shall be inserted, namely: –

“(2) In case a debtor disputes a part of default amount or entire default amount, such debtor shall provide the reasons for such dispute and upload the evidence for the same.

(3) In case of financial creditors which are banks included in the second schedule of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, an information utility shall issue a record of default with the status of authentication as ‘disputed’ for the default amount for which evidence of dispute has been received and verified, and issue a record of default with the status of authentication as ‘authenticated’ in respect of the balance default amount.”

RAVI MITAL, Chairperson

[ADVT.-III/4/Exty./385/2024-25]

Note: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) Regulations, 2017 were published vide Notification No. IBBI/2016-17/GN/REG009 dated 31st March, 2017 in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4, No. 129 on 31st March, 2017 and were last amended by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Information Utilities) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2022 published vide Notification No. IBBI/2022-23/GN/REG/098, dated the 20th September, 2022 in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part III, Section 4, No. 463 on 20th September, 2022.

Note: The success of insolvency proceedings critically depends on availability of complete, correct, and up-to-date information about the debtor. This information may not be available with every stakeholder in equal measure. The non-availability of the information may impede resolution and compromise the objective of value maximisation, while asymmetry of information may contribute to uneven sharing of the value. To address these issues, the Code envisages IU as repositories of financial information about debtors for expeditious completion of various processes under the Code. An IU is required to maintain electronic database of information and provide authentic information to eliminate delays and disputes relating to claims and defaults. To ensure that IUs capture the information necessary for the resolution of insolvency and bankruptcy, the Code makes submission of information mandatory for financial creditors. To take advantage of the services rendered by IU, the Reserve Bank of India has advised all financial creditors regulated by it to put in place appropriate systems and procedures to ensure compliance with the provisions of the IBC and the regulations made thereunder. Similarly, Securities and Exchange Board of India has advised debenture trustees to use the IU. The RBI amended the Credit Information Companies Regulations, 2006 on the 11th August, 2017 to enable IUs to access the information with Credit Information Companies as specified users. Further, regulation 26 of the IU Regulations enable an IU to import information from such registries as may be notified by the IBBI from time to time.

• PCIT has revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 over the cases passed by the NFAC or the JAO
• Appellate court interfering with MACT finding must undertake reappreciation of evidence
• When delay is not huge & involves huge monetary liability, lenient approach to be taken
• EoGM of company can not ratify diversion of fund raised by preferential issue – SC
• Return of export cargo from Hormuz Strait where vessel do not lands at original port