{"id":275467,"date":"2022-10-12T15:00:39","date_gmt":"2022-10-12T09:30:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=275467"},"modified":"2022-10-12T15:00:39","modified_gmt":"2022-10-12T09:30:39","slug":"whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/","title":{"rendered":"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

   <\/p>\n

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal<\/b> : While deciding an issue as to whether the adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66<\/a> of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016<\/a> during the subsistence of moratorium under S. 14<\/a> of IBC<\/a>, a 3-judge bench comprising of Ashok Bhushan, M. Satyanarayana Murthy<\/b>*, JJ., and Barun Mitra (Technical Member), held that the moratorium issued under S. 14<\/a> of the IBC<\/a> does not bar proceedings against the resolution professional for defrauding the creditors of its Corporate Debtor.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/span><\/p>\n

In the instant matter, the appellant, is a corporate insolvency resolution professional of HBN Homes Colonizers Ltd. And the respondent, is the Resolution Professional of HBN Foods Ltd. Both companies are undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).<\/p>\n

The respondent preferred an application against the appellant before the NCLT under Ss. 66, 68, 69, 70 and other relevant provisions of the IBC. Due to lockdown on account of Covid-19 pandemic, the Appellant could not represent himself during the proceedings. The NCLT vide order dated 13-07-2021, forfeited the right of appellant to file reply to the said application. The NCLT vide order date 13-12-2021 held that the respondents (including the appellant herein) have misappropriated Rs. 2687.27 Lakhs and they are jointly and severally liable to make such a contribution to the assets of HBN Foods Limited. The NCLT further directed to institute criminal prosecution against the respondents under S. 69<\/a> of the IBC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The appellant preferred an appeal before the NCLAT against the impugned order passed by the NCLT vide order dated 13-12-2021.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/span><\/p>\n

Whether the adjudicating authority is competent to pass order under S. 66<\/a> of IBC<\/a> during subsistence of moratorium under S. 14<\/a> of IBC<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Arguments Advanced<\/span><\/p>\n

The appellant contended that HBN Homes Colonizers Ltd. is undergoing CIRP and is under the protection of moratorium under S. 14<\/a> of the IBC<\/a>. The appellant also contended that no proceeding could be initiated against HBN Homes Colonizers Ltd., therefore the impugned order passed by the NCLT vide order dated 13-12-2021 is ex-facie erroneous and bad in law.<\/p>\n

The respondent contended that HBN Homes Colonizers Ltd. entered into fraudulent transactions which were against the interests of the creditors. The respondent contended that S. 14(1)(a)<\/a> of the IBC<\/a> in not applicable to facts of this case therefore the NCLT pass an appropriate order under S. 66<\/a> of the IBC<\/a>. The respondent also contended that the impugned order passed by NCLT while exercising power under S. 60(5)<\/a> of the IBC<\/a> which provides for adjudication of issues pertaining to corporate debtor during the course of the CIRP or liquidation process, requires no interference.<\/p>\n

Tribunal’s Observation<\/span><\/p>\n

The Tribunal observed that the Appellant did not challenge the impugned order on merits but limited his contentions to the issue of legality of the order passed under S. 66<\/a> of the IBC<\/a> against a company which is undergoing CIRP and that it is under the protection of moratorium envisaged under S. 14<\/a> of the IBC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Negating the contention of the appellant that the prohibition under S. 14(1)(a)<\/a> is applicable to Section 66<\/a> of IBC<\/a> also, the Tribunal observed that both the provisions are independent, incorporated for different purposes and they have to be read independently to achieve the object of the enactment. The Tribunal stated that<\/p>\n

“Section 14<\/a> of IBC<\/a> is intended to prevent fictitious claims by 3rd parties to realise the amount by execution of the orders decrees etc. whereas Section 66<\/a> of IBC<\/a> is intended to prevent fraudulent trading or business by corporate debtor through its corporate insolvency resolution professional or suspended directors, during insolvency resolution process or liquidation process.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The Tribunal relied on<\/b> M. Pentiah<\/i> v. Veeramallappa Muddala<\/i>, AIR 1961 SC 1107<\/a>; CIT<\/i> v. S. Teja Singh<\/i>, AIR 1959 SC 352<\/a> and Corpn. of Calcutta<\/i> v. Liberty Cinema<\/i>, AIR 1965 SC 1107<\/a> and opined that the provisions should be construed harmoniously to give effect the legislation and must be interpreted in such a way to avoid inconsistency or repugnancy. The Tribunal observed that the both the provisions, Ss. 14(1)(a)<\/a> and 66<\/a> of IBC<\/a> should be harmoniously constructed to make the enactment effective and workable.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal held that there is no inconsistency or repugnancy between the Ss. 14(1)(a)<\/a> and 66<\/a> of IBC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

“Section 14<\/a> of IBC<\/a> is a bar against institution and prosecution of any suits or proceedings or execution of orders and decrees in other courts or Tribunals but not a bar to pass appropriate order in the pending proceedings against the resolution professional or suspended directors and related parties, before the Adjudicating Authority, during the insolvency resolution process or liquidation process. On the other hand, Section 66<\/a> of IBC<\/a> empowered the Tribunal to pass appropriate orders when the suspended directors or insolvency professional of the Corporate Debtor carried on fraudulent trading or business during resolution process.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The Tribunal also observed that S. 60(5)(a)<\/a> of IBC<\/a> permits the NCLT to pass any order on any application or proceeding by or against the corporate debtor or corporate person notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law for the time being in force.<\/p>\n

Dismissing the appeal, the tribunal held that the impugned order passed by the NCLT deserves no interference.<\/p>\n

[Rakesh Kumar Jain v. Jagdish Singh Nain, 2022 SCC OnLine NCLAT 405<\/a>, decided on 04-08-2022<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Mr Mohit Nandwani, Advocate, Counsel for the Appellant;<\/p>\n

Mr Abhishek Naik (for R-1) and Ms. Gulafsha Kureshi, Advocate, Counsel for the Respondents.<\/p>\n\n

*Ritu Singh, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    National Company Law Appellate Tribunal : While deciding an issue as to whether the adjudicating authority is competent to pass <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":262229,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[33289,46259,22814,30182,22014],"class_list":["post-275467","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-adjudicating-authority","tag-bankruptcy-code","tag-corporate-insolvency-resolution-process","tag-national-company-law-appellate-tribunal","tag-nclat"],"yoast_head":"\nWhether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While deciding an issue as to whether adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While deciding an issue as to whether adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-10-12T09:30:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-10-12T09:30:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":908,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/02\\\/NCLAT_New.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Adjudicating Authority\",\"Bankruptcy Code\",\"corporate insolvency resolution process\",\"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal\",\"NCLAT\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"Tribunals\\\/Commissions\\\/Regulatory Bodies\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/\",\"name\":\"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/02\\\/NCLAT_New.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-10-12T09:30:39+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"While deciding an issue as to whether adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/02\\\/NCLAT_New.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2022\\\/02\\\/NCLAT_New.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888,\"caption\":\"NCLAT\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2022\\\/10\\\/12\\\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers | SCC Times","description":"While deciding an issue as to whether adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers","og_description":"While deciding an issue as to whether adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-10-12T09:30:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers","datePublished":"2022-10-12T09:30:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/"},"wordCount":908,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg","keywords":["Adjudicating Authority","Bankruptcy Code","corporate insolvency resolution process","National Company Law Appellate Tribunal","NCLAT"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","Tribunals\/Commissions\/Regulatory Bodies"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/","name":"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg","datePublished":"2022-10-12T09:30:39+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"While deciding an issue as to whether adjudicating authority is competent to pass an order under S. 66 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg","width":1331,"height":888,"caption":"NCLAT"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/10\/12\/whether-adjudicating-authority-is-competent-to-pass-order-under-section-66-of-ibc-during-subsistence-of-moratorium-under-section-14-of-ibc-nclat-answers\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Whether Adjudicating Authority is competent to pass order under Section 66 of IBC during subsistence of moratorium under Section 14 of IBC? NCLAT answers"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":306156,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/02\/irrevocable-and-unconditional-bank-guarantees-can-be-invoked-during-moratorium-period-nclat-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":275467,"position":0},"title":"Irrevocable and unconditional bank guarantees can be invoked during moratorium period: NCLAT","author":"Ritu","date":"November 2, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe \u2018Bank Guarantee\u2019 is a \u2018contract of Guarantee\u2019 provided\/furnished by the Bank, the \u201csurety\u201d, to perform the \u2018promise\u2019, or \u2018discharge\u2019 the liability, of the third person, being the Corporate Debtor herein, in case of his \u2018default\u2019.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"national company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":306105,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/01\/nclt-jurisdiction-imposition-fine-suspended-directors-non-cooperation-ibc-nclat-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":275467,"position":1},"title":"NCLT can\u2019t impose fine on suspended directors for non-cooperation under Sections 19(2) or 34(3) of IBC: NCLAT","author":"Ritu","date":"November 1, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Adjudicating Authority erred in passing the impugned order, directing the imposition fine, overlooking the law of the land through the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"national company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":376163,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/nclat-section7-ibc-application-not-barred-under-section10a\/","url_meta":{"origin":275467,"position":2},"title":"Section 7 IBC application must confine to the defaults committed after Section 10A period: NCLAT","author":"Bharti","date":"February 19, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\"When the Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) application is based on default committed subsequent to Section 10-A of the IBC period and the amount claimed subsequent to Section 10-A of the IBC period is well beyond threshold, application cannot be rejected on the ground.\"","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Section 7 IBC application maintainable for post-Section 10A defaults","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Section-7-IBC-application-maintainable-for-post-Section-10A-defaults.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Section-7-IBC-application-maintainable-for-post-Section-10A-defaults.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Section-7-IBC-application-maintainable-for-post-Section-10A-defaults.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/Section-7-IBC-application-maintainable-for-post-Section-10A-defaults.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":272619,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/30\/itat-effect-commencement-proceedings-ibc-pending-proceedings-tribunal-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":275467,"position":3},"title":"What is the effect of commencement of proceedings under the IBC, over any pending proceedings before another Court or Tribunal? ITAT discusses","author":"Editor","date":"August 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Hyderabad: While deciding the instant appeal in the backdrop of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceedings (CIRP) pending against the assessee before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), the Bench of Rama Kanta Panda (Accountant Member) and K. Narasimha Chary (Judicial Member), held that once the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Income Tax Appellate Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/ITAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":307307,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/16\/financial-debt-claims-under-section-58-of-ibc-cannot-be-entertained-after-cocs-approval-of-resolution-plan-nclat-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":275467,"position":4},"title":"Financial Debt claim under Section 5(8) of IBC cannot be entertained after CoC\u2019s approval of Resolution Plan: NCLAT","author":"Ritu","date":"November 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The NCLAT reiterated the importance of adhering to timelines in the Insolvency resolution process and the unacceptability of claims filed after the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"national company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":312265,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/26\/nclat-affirms-committee-of-creditors-authority-to-opt-for-liquidation-under-section-332-of-the-ibc-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":275467,"position":5},"title":"NCLAT affirms Committee of Creditors\u2019 authority to opt for liquidation under Section 33(2) of the IBC; sets aside show cause notice","author":"Ritu","date":"January 26, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The NCLAT held that the CoC had the jurisdiction to decide on liquidation as per Section 33(2) and its explanation, even before completing all steps for resolution.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"national company law appellate tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/national-company-law-appellate-tribunal-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/275467","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=275467"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/275467\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/262229"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=275467"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=275467"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=275467"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}