New Delhi, Appellate tribunal NCLAT has set aside an NCLT order directing the initiation of insolvency proceedings against Vikram Solar, noting that the operational debt involved was below the minimum threshold of Rs 1 crore prescribed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
A two-member bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) also directed refund of Rs 91,98,556/- deposited by Vikram Solar, the entire admitted operational debt claimed by its creditor Isitva Steels.
Moreover, the bench comprising Justice Yogesh Khanna and Technical Member Naresh Salecha, also said “settlement, if any, can be adverted to between the parties.”
The NCLAT direction came during the hearing on Monday, which contended that the insolvency petition should not have been admitted as the amount claimed was less than Rs 1 crore, the threshold prescribed under Section 4 of the IBC Code.
This was also acknowledged by the operational creditor’s counsel that the overall debt was below Rs 1 crore.
Recording their submissions, the appellate tribunal held that since the due amount was less than Rs 1 crore, the admission order dated June 12, 2026 could not be sustained.
“Taking the submissions of both the Counsel on record, and since it is admitted case that the due amount was less than Rs one crore, the admission order dated June 12, 2026, stands set aside,” said NCLAT.
The NCLAT direction came over an appeal filed by Sameer Nagpal, director of Vikram Solar, against the order passed by NCLT.
The Kolkata bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), on June 19, ordered the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Vikram Solar after admitting a plea of its operational creditor, Isitva Steels.
NCLT had also appointed an interim resolution professional for Vikram Solar, suspending the board of the company as per the procedure laid down in the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code.
In the last hearing before NCLAT, Vikram Solar’s counsel submitted that while the company had a strong case on merits, it was willing to deposit Rs 91.98 lakh without prejudice to its rights to demonstrate its bona fides.
The appellant had contended that the parties had earlier entered into a settlement under which Rs 4.60 crore was agreed as a full and final settlement, of which Rs 4.14 crore had already been paid. It further submitted that an additional Rs 70 lakh was subsequently paid and that an email from the operational creditor acknowledged the outstanding liability at Rs 91.98 lakh.
The company had also argued that initiation of insolvency proceedings would adversely affect a listed entity with a market capitalisation of around Rs 9,000 crore, annual revenue exceeding Rs 4,800 crore and a workforce of about 3,500 employees.
