AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
20.02.2025 : Heard Counsel for the Appellant and Counsel for the Respondent.
This Appeal has been filed by the Liquidator challenging the Order dated 10.12.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench, Court – II, Kolkata) in I.A. (IB) No. 613 of 2020 in C.P. (IB) No. 980 of 2018, by which Order, I.A. No. 613/2020 filed by the Liquidator under Section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (for short ‘The Code’ or ‘The IBC’) has been rejected.
The Application was filed by the Liquidator alleging variations/discrepancies of the stock of various items listed in the table, which has been noticed in Paragraph 7 of the Order. Adjudicating Authority considered the submissions of the Parties and has held that the fact that discrepancies exist in the stock which existed 10 years back without any evidence of fraud, mere possibility of fraud cannot be a ground to accept the Application.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that there were huge discrepancies and there was shortage of material which runs into several crores and the mere fact that Income Tax Authorities and VAT Authorities have not noticed the said discrepancy cannot be a ground to reject the Application.
We have considered the submissions of Counsel for the Appellant and perused the record.
The fact which has been brought on the record it is clear that the discrepancies/variations in stock were in the Financial Year 2010-11 i.e., 10 years prior to filing the Application under Section 66(1) of the Code by the Liquidator. The mere discrepancy in the stock cannot lead to any conclusion that there was any transaction which is covered by Section 66 of the Code, for recording a finding that transaction is covered by Section 66 of the Code specific pleadings and materials are required which are wanting in the present case. Adjudicating Authority has considered the submissions and come to the conclusion that no grounds have been made out to commence any proceedings under Section 66 of the IBC.
We are of the view that there is no error in the Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority warranting any interference of this Appellate Tribunal.
Appeal dismissed.