![](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/d515a3_63b77778a10e48b1ae6c01dcf466a4d9~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_600,h_400,al_c,q_80,enc_auto/d515a3_63b77778a10e48b1ae6c01dcf466a4d9~mv2.jpg)
The NCLAT has ordered a fresh review of the Section 7 application, allowing the appellant to submit complete documentation for a fair consideration of the case.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra & Arun Baroka (Technical Members) was hearing an appeal filed by the Financial creditor and observed that an appellant must be given an opportunity to submit all relevant documents for a fresh review of a Section 7 application if initial documentation was inadequate, and the Adjudicating Authority must reconsider the application based on the complete record without the Tribunal expressing any opinion on the merits.
The appeal challenged the Adjudicating Authority's order dated 31.05.2023, which had rejected the appellant's Section 7 application on the grounds of inadequate documentation. The NCLAT noted that relevant documents, including the NeSL Certificate, had been submitted and considered during the appeal. It was determined that the appellant should be granted an opportunity to submit all pertinent documents via an Additional-Affidavit to the Adjudicating Authority for reconsideration.
The NCLAT initially issued notices to the respondents on 12.09.2023, addressing the appellant's failure to file the NeSL certificate, balance sheet, and TDS certificate under Section 194A of the Income Tax Act before the Adjudicating Authority. Despite these documents being presented in the appeal to indicate the existence of a financial debt, the notices issued were not served, leading the appellant to opt for service by publication. Affidavits of service were filed, but as of 14.02.2024, no respondents appeared.
Consequently, the NCLAT set aside the order dated 14.06.2023 and directed that the Section 7 application be revived and reviewed afresh by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal emphasized that it was not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving it to the Adjudicating Authority to make a determination based on the updated record. The appeal was disposed of with these directions.
Subscribers can access the Case, including Case Analysis, Ratio Decidendi, Headnotes, Briefs, Case Research, Cited Case Laws, Case Law Cross-references, and the latest updates on Statutes, Notifications, Circulars, Guidelines Press Release and more.
Click on the Citation/Link to access these resources
Comments