Three Insolvency Professionals offered by interim resolution professional must be from the State/UT which has highest number of creditors. IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (4th Amendment) Regulations, 2020.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) notified the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) (Fourth Amendment) Regulations, 2020 today.
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) envisages appointment of an authorised representative (AR) by the Adjudicating Authority to represent financial creditors in a class, like allottees under a real estate project, in the committee of creditors.
For this purpose, the Regulations require the interim resolution professional to offer a choice of three Insolvency Professionals (IP) in the public announcement, and the creditors in a class to choose one of them to act as their authorised representative.
The amendment made to the Regulations provides that the three IPs offered by the interim resolution professional must be from the State or Union Territory, which has the highest number of creditors in the class as per records of the corporate debtor. This will facilitate ease of coordination and communication between the AR and the creditors in the class he represents.
The Regulations currently envisage that the authorised representative shall seek voting instructions from creditors in a class at two stages, namely, (i) before the meeting; and (ii) after circulation of minutes of meeting. The amendment made to the Regulations provides that the authorised representative shall seek voting instructions only after circulation of minutes of meeting and vote accordingly. He shall, however, circulate the agenda, and may seek preliminary views of creditors in the class before the meeting, to enable him to effectively participate in the meeting.
The Regulations provide that the committee of creditors shall evaluate all compliant resolution plans as per evaluation matrix to identify the best of them and may approve it. The amendment made to the Regulations provides that after evaluation of all compliant resolution plans as per evaluation matrix, the committee of creditors shall vote on all compliant resolution plans simultaneously. The resolution plan, which receives the highest votes, but not less than sixty-six percent of voting share, shall be considered as approved.
The amendment Regulations are effective from today.
Voting Outcome |
% of votes in favour of | Status of approval | |
Plan A | Plan B | ||
1 | 55 | 60 | No Plan is approved, as neither of the Plans received requisite votes. The committee shall vote again on Plan B, which received the higher votes, subject to the timelines under the Code |
2 | 70 | 75 | Plan B is approved, as it received higher votes, which is not less than requisite votes |
3 | 75 | 75 | The committee shall approve either Plan A or Plan B, as per the tie-breaker formula announced before voting.” |
Change in the constitution of Appellate Authority for CAs CSs and Cost Accountants In 2015, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs…
Trade Tax Department was unjustified in retaining refund beyond stipulated period and adjusting it against default notices issued subsequently. In…
Notice issued u/s 143(2) prior to filing of return of income by the assessee was invalid. Before filing ITR provisions…
Order u/s 148A(d) passed against non-existent entity is bad in eyes of law. Mere activation of PAN not give right…
Tax authorities not bound with provisions of section 44AE of the Act once assessee waived the option available In a…
Whether seized document is incriminating or not is definitely a findings of fact – High Court In a recent judgment,…