Skip to main content

NBFCs Accepting Deposit Is Outside The Purview Of Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code

In Randhiraj Thakur, Director, Mayfair Capital Private Ltd vs Jindal Saxena Financial Services and Mayfair Capital Private Ltd., wherein appeal was preferred by the appellant seeking, inter-alia, setting aside order passed by the Adjudicating Authority whereby the application preferred by the 1st Respondent (Financial Creditor) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been admitted.

The NCLAT noted that an ‘Inter Corporate Deposit Agreement’ was arrived at between Jindal and Mayfair, which is a non-banking financial company. It further noted that Mayfair had undertaken financial services by accepting deposit from Jindal, in terms of Section 3(16) of the Code. It thereby asserted that it cannot be held that the amount was accepted towards public deposits. Therefore M/s. Mayfair Capital Pvt. Ltd. cannot be treated to be ‘Corporate Debtor’ and ‘M/s. Mayfair Capital Pvt. Ltd.’ (2nd Respondent) being a ‘financial service provider’ and having excluded from the definition of ‘corporate person’ under sub- section (7) of Section 3 of the I&B Code the application under Section 7 was not maintainable against ‘M/s. Mayfair Capital Pvt. Ltd’.

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

A liquidator must pay GST on sale of assets of a defunct company

The West Bengal Authority of Advance Ruling has ruled that a National Company Law Tribunal appointed liquidator must have the GST registration till all liabilities cease to exist and that the liquidator must pay goods and services tax (GST) on sale of assets of a defunct company under liquidation, as the sale is effectively supply of goods. 
Post a Comment
Read more

Revival of a sick company to take precedence over recovery proceedings, SC rules

The Supreme Court has said that the revival of a sick company will take precedence over recovery proceedings. The provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies Act (SICA), 1985, will prevail over the Recover/y of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions (RDBB) Act, 1993, said a three-judge bench, headed by chief justice of India HL Dattu. "We hold that the provisions of SICA, in particular Section 22, shall prevail over the provision for the recovery of debts in the RDDB Act," said the bench, which also comprised justices SA Bobde and Abhay Manohar Sapre. KSL & Industries Ltd had challenged a February 2006 ruling by the Delhi High Court which held that in view of the specific bar contained in SICA, no recovery proceedings could be effected against M/s Arihant Threads Ltd. It had set aside the order passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT), Delhi, on this ground. The issue then went to a two-judge bench, comprising justices CK Thakker and Altamas Kab...
Post a Comment
Read more