{"id":289432,"date":"2023-04-14T09:00:25","date_gmt":"2023-04-14T03:30:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=289432"},"modified":"2023-05-16T10:23:53","modified_gmt":"2023-05-16T04:53:53","slug":"nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT&#8217;s order"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 document.title = 'Application under Section 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into shoes of Operational Creditor: NCLAT | SCC Blog'\n\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 document.querySelector('meta[name=\"description\"]').setAttribute(\"content\", \"NCLAT held that application under Section 7 IBC is not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor.\");\n<\/script><\/p>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><b>National Company Law Appellate Tribunal:<\/b> While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of <b>Rakesh Kumar Jain<\/b>*, J. and Naresh Salecha (Technical Member), held the application filed by the appellants in the second appeal as Financial Creditor under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549806\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">7<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016<\/a> is not maintainable but they can avail their remedy by filing an application under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">9<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> as Operational Creditor in relation to the invoices generated by the seller.<\/p>\n<p><b>Factual Matrix<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In the instant matter, the appellant\/Minions Ventures (P) Ltd. in the first appeal, is a private limited company which provides an online platform &#8216;KredX&#8217; for invoice-discounting\/reverse invoice discounting to raise working capital and the appellants in the second appeal are registered as the &#8216;Financiers&#8217; on KredX who provide finance to the concerned party.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">An &#8216;Agreement for Creation of Rights&#8217; (COR) was executed between the appellants in the second appeal, respondent\/Corporate Debtor &#8211; TDT Copper Ltd., Seller (M\/s Ashoka Creations (P) Ltd.) and the Appellant in the first appeal, for creating rights in the receivables under the invoices in favour of the Appellants in the second appeal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The appellants in the second appeal discounted the invoices and deposited the amounts in an escrow account maintained by KredX and the said amount was then transferred to the account of the Seller, as a result the Corporate Debtor&#8217;s liability to pay towards Seller stood extinguished and shifted towards the appellants in the second appeal. Despite communication by the appellant in the first appeal, the Corporate Debtor did not service the debt amount due to appellants in the second appeal, resulting in filing of S. 7 application by the appellants in the second appeal as Financial Creditor before the Adjudicating Authority.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Adjudicating Authority vide dated 11-03-2022, rejected S. 7 application on the ground that the appellants have stepped into shoes of the Operational Creditor\/Seller, therefore, their application under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549806\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">7<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> as a Financial Creditor is not maintainable and gave them the liberty to file an appropriate application under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">9<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> in accordance with law. Aggrieved by the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority, the appellants filed separate appeals challenging the same before the NCLAT.<\/p>\n<p><b>Moot Point<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Whether the Appellants in the second appeal (Financiers) are the Financial Creditors as against the Corporate Debtor or have stepped into the shoes of Seller as an Operational Creditors?<\/p>\n<p><b>Sections Touched Upon<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">S. 5(7) &#8211; Financial Creditor:<\/span> Any person to whom a financial debt is owed and includes a person to whom such debt has been legally assigned or transferred to.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">S. 5(8)(e) &#8211; Financial Debt:<\/span> A debt alongwith interest if any which is disbursed against the consideration for the time value of money and includes (e) receivables sold or discounted other than any receivables sold on non-recourse basis.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">S. 5(20) &#8211; Operational Creditor:<\/span> A person to whom an operational debt is owed and includes any person to whom such debt has been legally assigned or transferred.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"text-decoration: underline;\">S. 21(5)<\/span> &#8211; Where an operational creditor has assigned or legally transferred any operational debt to a financial creditor, the assignee or transferee shall be considered as an operational creditor to the extent of such assignment or legal transfer.<\/p>\n<p><b>NCLAT&#8217;s Observation<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">NCLAT observed that as per COR, the appellants in the second appeal discounted the invoice as a Financier and deposited the amounts into an escrow\/nodal account under Yes Bank Limited maintained by KredX. The deposited amount was further transferred to the account of the Seller and then the Seller transferred its right to receive the money under the invoices in favour of the Financiers\/appellants. NCLAT further observed that in this transaction no money was disbursed much less for the time value as a financial debt to the Corporate Debtor and due to discounting the invoice of the Seller the Financiers\/Appellants entered into shoes of the Seller and became Operational Creditors in terms of Ss. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549784\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5(20)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549707\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">21(5)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> and not Financial Creditor in terms of Ss. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549784\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5(7)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549784\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5(8)(e)<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><b>NCLAT&#8217;s Verdict<\/b><\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">NCLAT upheld the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority rejecting the S. 7 application but relegated the appellants (Financiers) to avail their remedy under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">9<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> in accordance with law as their claim can only be maintainable as an Operational Creditor in relation to the invoices generated by the seller.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Minions Ventures (P) Ltd. v. TDT Copper Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/b9bQ764d\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2023 SCC OnLine NCLAT 171<\/a>, decided on 28-03-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000080;\">*Judgment by Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Mr. Mayank Mikhail Mukherjee, Ms. Gayatri Virmani, Mr. Abhishek Vikram, Counsel for the Appellants;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Mr. Ninad Laud, Ms. Anshula Grover, Mr. Ivo D&#8217;Costa, Ms. Rashika Narain, Mr. Avinash Mathews, Ms. Nitika Grover, Counsel for the Respondent.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><i>NCLAT held that the application preferred by the appellants in the second appeal under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549806\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">7<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> has rightly been held to be not maintainable and was rightly relegated to avail their remedy of filing the application under S. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001549828\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">9<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002802178\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">IBC<\/a> in relation to invoice discounting of the receivables by the seller.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":284626,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[30596,25934,56800,30182,22014,12521,34910],"class_list":["post-289432","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-corporate-debtor","tag-financial-creditor","tag-invoice-discounting","tag-national-company-law-appellate-tribunal","tag-nclat","tag-nclt","tag-operational-creditor"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT&#039;s order | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of Rakesh Kumar Jain, J\" \/>\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\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT&#039;s order\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of Rakesh Kumar Jain, J\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\" \/>\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=\"2023-04-14T03:30:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-05-16T04:53:53+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\",\"name\":\"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT's order | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-04-14T03:30:25+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-05-16T04:53:53+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of Rakesh Kumar Jain, J\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT&#8217;s order\"}]},{\"@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\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT's order | SCC Times","description":"While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of Rakesh Kumar Jain, J","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\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT's order","og_description":"While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of Rakesh Kumar Jain, J","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-04-14T03:30:25+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-05-16T04:53:53+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","name":"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT's order | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png","datePublished":"2023-04-14T03:30:25+00:00","dateModified":"2023-05-16T04:53:53+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"While upholding the order of rejection of a S. 7 application by Adjudicating Authority, the Division Bench comprising of Rakesh Kumar Jain, J","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/14\/nclt-ibc-application-rejected-nclat-appeal-invoice-discounting-receivable-operational-creditor-dismissed-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Application U\/S 7 IBC not maintainable if Financial Creditor steps into the shoes of Operational Creditor; NCLAT upholds NCLT&#8217;s order"}]},{"@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\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-458.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":376163,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/19\/nclat-section7-ibc-application-not-barred-under-section10a\/","url_meta":{"origin":289432,"position":0},"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 &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":297888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/28\/operational-creditor-cannot-claim-payment-equal-to-financial-creditor-in-insolvency-proceeding-under-ibc-nclat\/","url_meta":{"origin":289432,"position":1},"title":"Operational Creditor cannot claim payment equal to Financial Creditor in Insolvency proceeding under IBC: NCLAT","author":"Ritu","date":"July 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The principle of equality is applicable only in same class of creditors, i.e., secured or unsecured, financial or operational.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":270628,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/25\/nclat-mumbai-interest-on-delayed-payments-is-a-part-of-operational-debt-under-s-311-of-ibc\/","url_meta":{"origin":289432,"position":2},"title":"NCLAT Mumbai |Interest on Delayed Payments is a part of Operational Debt under S. 3(11) of IBC","author":"Editor","date":"July 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai: The Bench of Ashok Bhushan, J., Chairperson, M. Satyanarayana Murthy, Judicial Member, and Naresh Salecha, Technical member has dismissed a company appeal and has held that interest on delayed payment is also a form of debt and therefore, would form a part of the operational\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"NCLAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/NCLAT_New.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":306753,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/07\/nclat-rejects-application-under-section-9-of-the-ibc-as-being-time-barred-scc-blog-legal-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":289432,"position":3},"title":"\u2018Withdrawal of suit cannot be considered as failure of prior proceeding\u2019; NCLAT rejects Section 9 application as being time-barred","author":"Ritu","date":"November 7, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"A mere availability of arbitration or any other proceeding could not preclude the operational creditor from initiating proceedings under Section 9 of the IBC. The critical question would be whether the application was filed within the limitation period.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":214891,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/05\/21\/nclat-rejection-of-application-under-s-9-ibc-upheld-where-cirp-initiated-with-fraudulent-and-malicious-intent\/","url_meta":{"origin":289432,"position":4},"title":"NCLAT | Rejection of application under S. 9 IBC upheld where CIRP initiated with &#8216;fraudulent and malicious&#8217; intent","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 21, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A Bench of S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice A.I.S Cheema, Member (Judicial) and Kanthi Narahari, Member (Technical) upheld the impugned decision whereby the appellant's (Operational Creditor's) application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed against the respondent (Corporate Debtor) was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":296343,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/08\/corporate-debtor-cannot-constitute-committee-of-creditors-with-a-single-operational-creditor-under-ibc-nclat\/","url_meta":{"origin":289432,"position":5},"title":"Corporate Debtor cannot constitute Committee of Creditors with a single Operational Creditor under IBC: NCLAT","author":"Ritu","date":"July 8, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"NCLAT held that CIRP be closed with respect to the Corporate Debtor since not a single \u2018Claim' was received by the IRP even after the public announcement.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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\/289432","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\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=289432"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289432\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/284626"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=289432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=289432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=289432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}