NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Dismisses Appeal of Suspended Director in Corporate Insolvency Proceedings Due to Late Submission of Expression of Interest. Timeliness in submission of Expression of Interest is critical under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appeal was filed by a suspended director of PK Global Power Pvt. Ltd. against an order of the Adjudicating Authority regarding the submission of an Expression of Interest (EoI) in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The Appellant claimed to have submitted an EoI in response to the initial Form G but failed to submit within the revised timeline after the Form G was re-issued. The Resolution Professional rejected the late submission, stating that it could not be entertained as per the CIRP Regulations. The Appellant argued that he was not informed of the new dates for the Form G, which led to his inability to submit on time. The Resolution Professional countered that the Appellant's offer was considered in a prior Committee of Creditors meeting and deemed unacceptable. The Adjudicating Authority found no error in the Resolution Professional's decision, as the Appellant did not submit the EoI by the deadline. The Tribunal noted that the application for approval of the Resolution Plan was still pending and indicated that the Appellant could seek legal remedies following the decision on the Plan. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the importance of compliance with procedural timelines in insolvency proceedings.

Headnote

A) Corporate Law - Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process - Timeliness of Submission - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 30 - The Appellant failed to submit the Expression of Interest within the stipulated time after the re-issuance of Form G, leading to rejection by the Resolution Professional. The Adjudicating Authority upheld this decision, emphasizing the importance of adhering to timelines set forth in the CIRP Regulations. Held that the RP acted within the law in rejecting the late submission (Paras 11-12).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the Appellant's late submission of Expression of Interest should be accepted despite the revised timeline.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the Adjudicating Authority's decision to reject the late submission of the Expression of Interest due to non-compliance with the stipulated timelines.

Law Points

  • Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process
  • Expression of Interest
  • Committee of Creditors
  • Adjudicating Authority
  • MSME provisions
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (06) 58

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 778 of 2026

2026-06-30

Justice Ashok Bhushan, Barun Mitra

Mr. Honey Satpal, Mr. Akash Agarwalla, Mr. Aman, Ms. Teena Saraswat Pandey

Prashant Kumar Gupta

Teena Saraswat Pandey

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against the order of the Adjudicating Authority regarding the submission of Expression of Interest in insolvency proceedings.

Remedy Sought

The Appellant sought to have his late submission of Expression of Interest accepted.

Filing Reason

The Appellant claimed he was unaware of the revised timeline for submission of the Expression of Interest.

Previous Decisions

The Adjudicating Authority had previously rejected the Appellant's application for late submission.

Issues

Whether the late submission of Expression of Interest can be accepted under the CIRP regulations. Whether the Appellant was adequately informed of the revised timelines.

Submissions/Arguments

The Appellant argued he was not informed of the new dates for Form G, leading to his late submission. The Resolution Professional contended that the late submission could not be entertained as per the CIRP Regulations.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal emphasized the necessity of adhering to timelines in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, stating that late submissions cannot be accepted as per the regulations.

Judgment Excerpts

The Appellant is a suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor who claims to have submitted an Expression of Interest. The Adjudicating Authority has taken the view that when the Appellant has not submitted the Expression of Interest, even after Form G was re-issued...

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against the order of the Adjudicating Authority in IA (I.B.C.) 01/2026, which rejected the Appellant's application regarding the submission of Expression of Interest.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code: 30
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Central Excise Duty Classification Case — Clarifies Definition of Pipe Fittings.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused in Atrocities Act Case Due to Lack of Prima Facie Evidence of Caste-Based Intent. Appellant's involvement in murder conspiracy not established by direct evidence; bail granted under Section 14-A(2) of SC/ST Ac...