Amar Remedies Ltd (Company) had initiated CIRP which was duly admitted by the NCLT in Mumbai. While the CIRP was at the final stage, a member from the CoC approached/ appraised the NCLT of a winding up order passed by the High Court for the Company. The NCLT took up the issue of Section 11(d) of IBC in the application seeking approval of the Resolution Plan and held that the said application was filed by suppressing the material facts in relation to the winding up order of the High Court and hence, the Company was disqualified. Meanwhile, an application seeking approval of Resolution Plan was filed by the RP. The NCLT further held that such act amounts to violation of Section 77 of IBC which states the punishment for providing false information in an application made by the corporate debtor. The NCLT imposed a fine of Rs.10 lakhs on the Company and directed the Registrar of Companies to lodge prosecution against the Company.

The Firm advised the Promoters and filed an appeal before the NCLAT, wherein the Firm, pleaded that the prescribed Form does not require the Corporate Applicant to disclose about winding up proceedings. Hence, non-disclosure of such facts shall not amount to suppression. Further, that the Company had filed the application under Section 10 of IBC, pursuant to Section 252 of IBC (Section 4(b) of SICA Repeal Act) and while relying upon the object and purpose of IBC, the Firm pleaded that since there is an approved resolution plan in hand, therefore the Company shall not be relegated to liquidation. Ashu Kansal, Partner, Aditha Advisors represented the firm/promoters before the Tribunal and hence a stay was imposed in the directions of the NCLT.