1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. The introduction of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”) ushered in a new era in the distressed asset landscape
and was undoubtedly a significant reform. Prior to introduction of the Code,
multiple regulations, at times not in congruence, were leading to disputes and
defaults thus invariably delaying the entire process. The laws addressing the
revival and financial reconstruction were provided for under different Acts.
These different laws were implemented in different judicial forums, namely (i)
Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (ii) Presidential Towns Insolvency Act, 1909
(iii) Winding up provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 (iv) Sick Industrial
Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (v) Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and
Financial Institutions Act, 1993 and the (vi) Securitisation &
Reconstruction of Financial Assets, Enforcement of Security Interests Act, 2002
which often led to delay in achieving the end objective of
resolution/reconstruction.
1.2. The defining aspect of the Code is the strict
adherence to timelines, an aspect which was relatively absent in previous
legislations. The Code explicitly provides for a 180-day period of resolution
of the corporate debtor with an extension of 90 days. The lapse of 180/270 days
leads to the compulsory liquidation of the corporate debtor. The Code has
ushered in a change from the existing situation of “debtor in possession” to
“creditor in control”. This overhaul has empowered the creditors to take
decisions for the benefit of the corporate debtor and the creditors with
relatively less opposition from the promoters or the erstwhile directors of the
corporate debtor whose powers have been suspended during the period of
moratorium, which lasts during the period of the Corporate Insolvency
Resolution Process.
1.3. The Code has given significant headroom to
indebted companies reeling under pressure to meet their obligations and has
facilitated the lenders to expedite recovery and resolution of stressed assets.
The Code stipulates a strict 180-day window (extendable to 270 days) for
running and completing the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The
time-bound nature of the process is a unique feature that provides confidence
to the creditors and the appointment of an Independent Resolution Professional
to manage the process makes the entire ecosystem of resolution more sacrosanct.
2. IMPORTANCE OF INFORMATION
2.1. As an Interim Resolution
Professional/Resolution Professional (IRP/RP), one assumes the management
responsibilities of the company since the board of directors of the corporate
debtor stands suspended u/s. 17 of the Code.
2.2. While the IRP/RP is entrusted with the duty of
managing the company as a going concern during the CIRP and steer it towards a
successful resolution, he is required to comply with the provisions of various
regulations which govern the company undergoing CIRP.
2.3. As a process, the IRP/RP assumes the control
of the company once the CIRP is initiated and takes charge of the books of
accounts, financial information and records, assets and operations of the
company.
2.4. Various provisions of the Code require the
IRP/RP to take on record the financial information relating to the company for
present and past time period. For example, section 18 of the Code requires that
the IRP on assuming charge of the company has to collect all information
relating to the assets, finances and operations of the corporate debtor for
determining the financial position of the corporate debtor, including
information relating to, inter alia, financial and operational payments
for the previous two years and list of assets and liabilities as on the initiation
date.
2.5. In order to ensure a time-bound and speedy
mechanism, due care with appropriate safeguards needs to be incorporated so as
to ensure that the scales are balanced with regard to the speed, accuracy and
authenticity of the information, accompanied by its legality. In view thereof,
the Code has envisaged four pillars of institutional infrastructure. These
pillars include a new competitive industry of Information Utilities (IUs),
which has probably no parallel in India or abroad. These have been envisioned
with a view that they would store authentic and verified financial information
such as debt and default, assets and liabilities of corporates, partnerships
and individuals. Further, they shall hold a collection of information about all
corporate and individual entities at all times. Thus, when the Insolvency
Resolution Process would commence under the Code, within less than a day,
undisputed and complete information would become available to all stakeholders
involved in the process and thus address the source of delay in dissemination
of information.
However, till date the IU pillar of the IBC has not been optimally developed
and is still in its nascent stage
2.6. Further, Regulation 36 of the Code requires
the Resolution Professional to prepare and submit an information memorandum
including, inter alia, the latest financial statements, the audited
financial statements of the corporate debtor for the last two financial years
and provisional financial statements for the current financial year made up to
a date not earlier than 14 days from the date of the application to CIRP.
2.7. Apart from this, the RP while undertaking his
duties under the Code requires that all the information pertaining to the
accounts of the company is kept up-to-date in order to ensure adequate
disclosures with respect to compliances, CIRP costs etc., during the CIRP as
and when required by IBBI.
2.8. Regular updating of accounting statements and
financial records is also required since the Code provides rights to the
Committee of Creditors of the Company to ask the RP for providing them with any
particular financial information during the process. Apart from this, the
Resolution Professional while dealing with prospective investors is also often
required to provide latest financial information which is required by the
investors for submission of the resolution plan.
2.9. The IBBI vide Circular dated 3rd January
2018 has directed all Insolvency Professionals to exercise reasonable care and
diligence and take all necessary steps to ensure that corporate persons
undergoing Insolvency Resolution Process, fast-track Insolvency Resolution
Process, liquidation process or voluntary liquidation process under the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 comply with provisions of the applicable
laws (Acts, Rules and Regulations, Circulars, Guidelines, Orders, Directions,
etc.) during such process. For example, a corporate person undergoing
Insolvency Resolution Process, if listed on a stock exchange, needs to comply
with every provision of the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Listing
Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, unless the provision
is specifically exempted by the competent authority or becomes inapplicable by
operation of law for the corporate person. This implies that it is the RP’s
responsibility to ensure that all the financial statements falling during the
CIRP are duly prepared and published as required under applicable laws and
regulations.
2.10. This aspect regarding compliance of various
laws during the CIRP process was also touched upon by the Mumbai NCLT Bench in
the case of Roofit Industries, where it noted that companies are governed by
various enactments, they have to run in compliance with the laws of this
country and it can’t be said that companies running under CIRP are free to
flout all other laws.
2.11. It is also to be noted that requirements
pertaining to their payment of tax or filing of returns during the CIRP would
be primarily the responsibility of the IRP/RP.
3. THE CHALLENGE
3.1. More often than not it is observed that the
IRP/RP’s face challenges in terms of availability of financial information,
various legacy non-compliances spilling over into the CIRP period, ongoing tax
appeals/litigations, lack of required data to finalise the books of accounts
and so on.
3.2. There are instances where it is found that
inadequate accounting procedures are followed by a company under CIRP and the
company may not have contemporaneous records pertaining to previous periods
maintained with it. This usually stems from the fact that there is usually a
brain-drain of key executives of the company undergoing CIRP, a possible case
of mismanagement in the past resulting in loss of records, loss of data during
handover by employees who have left the company, possible IT
infrastructure-related issues like server crashes, as also the various existing
non-compliances resulting in levy of penalties and interest.
3.3. Thus, the IRP/RP usually finds himself with a
myriad of challenges in meeting the ongoing compliances during the CIRP.
Although the Code u/s. 19 stipulates that the personnel of the corporate debtor
have to extend help to the Interim Resolution Professional in terms of running
the process and provide the necessary information, the primary responsibility
of compliance remains with the IRP/RP.
3.4. It is possible that the accounts of the
company for the year preceding the year in which the CIRP was initiated have
not been finalised and published as on the date of CIRP and with the board of
directors of the company now suspended, the RP has a task cut for him to ensure
the compliance of finalising the accounts. In such circumstances which are
usually also caused by lack of necessary co-operation from the previous
management of the company and lack of necessary information, the RP finds
himself in a challenging situation where he has to completely re-do the
financial statements to ensure their correctness and completeness.
3.5. This, in addition to possible non-availability
of past records, absence of adequate man-power within the company undergoing
CIRP and a legacy of past non-compliances poses a real challenge for the IRP/RP
in meeting the ongoing compliance.
3.6. As the auditor of the company is also required
to comment regarding the going concern status of the company in its audit
report, it becomes very difficult to harmonise the idea of going concern for a
company under CIRP to express an opinion.
3.7. The Resolution Professional is also required
to carry out a liquidation and fair valuation of the assets of the company
under CIRP. This also gives rise to various difficulties in integrating the
finding of the valuer appointed by the Resolution Professional which carries
out the liquidation and fair valuation within certain assumptions and a
framework, with the requirement to restate the financial statements as per the
applicable accounting standards for the company undergoing CIRP.
3.8. The matters pertaining to taxation also need
to be dealt with caution as there could be several ongoing cases that may
result into demands and penalties during the CIRP period. This requires the
IRP/RP to understand all the ongoing litigations to ensure that necessary steps
are taken to address the same. It is not quite possible to imagine a situation
where the bank accounts of the company under CIRP are attached u/s. 226 of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 for non-compliances before the CIRP. This leaves the
IRP/RP with a challenging situation where on the one hand he is duty-bound to maintain the
going concern status of the company, while on the other, the company’s bank
accounts are frozen affecting its ability to conduct day-to-day operations
smoothly.
3.9. This brings to the fore an important aspect of
overriding of legislations. Although section 238 of the Code is an over-riding
provision, it has been tested on various occasions as to its applicability and
operability given the evolving jurisprudence of the Code.
3.10. The problem of inadequate past financial
data bears an impact during the ongoing tax assessments as well. The company
usually reeling under financial stress finds itself in a difficult position to
meet the requirement for paying the appeal deposit or representing before the
tax authorities. This, however, does not absolve the RP of any compliances and
requires that he has to ensure that appropriate actions, be it appeal or
otherwise, are taken.
3.11. Section 80 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
provides that in the event a taxpayer fails to file return in accordance with
the provisions of section 139(3) of the Act, the carry-forward losses computed
in accordance with the sections specified therein would lapse. The RP often faces
some practical predicaments relating to filing of timely income tax returns
with inadequate available data, requirement of filing with respect to digital
signatures, changing of signatories for filing returns without support from the
previous signatories, etc. The direct implication of such non-compliance would
be to lose the benefit of carrying forward losses of the year.
3.12. Another set of challenges which may have an
implication on compliances is the mandatory applicability of Indian Accounting
Standards applicable to certain class of companies. Ind AS 8 deals with
Accounting Policies, Changes in Accounting Estimates and Errors. The said
standard mandates that any material prior period error is to be set right by
restating the financial statements of that year. A tax complication may arise
as to whether such error impacting the profit/loss of earlier years would be
allowed as an expenditure in the year of resolution or should be claimed for
the year when such error occured. Such claim would be possible only if the
timeline for revised return permits the same. In a nutshell, the claim in
respect of such error may not be available if one were to take the provision of
law and jurisprudence on the subject.
3.13. One other aspect of taxation is the claims
admission process, wherein the IRP/RP is required to deal with various claims
by the tax authorities including claims arising out of ongoing cases or cases
under appeal. The law is still evolving on the subject of determining the
amount of claim in case of liabilities which are not crystallised on the date
of submission of claim or are contingent on the happening/non-happening of
certain events in future.
3.14. Like the IBC, another reform that is still
in its sapling stages is GST. It is possible that the company under CIRP often
does not have adequate resources and manpower to ensure various GST compliances
including registration, transition from previous indirect tax regime to GST
regime or necessary infrastructure to implement GST.
3.15. A few other aspects that remain to be
tested are the possibility of waiver of existing tax demand on approval of a
Resolution Plan, tax liability of the period up to the date of approval of
Resolution Plan but crystallised afterwards, and waiver of tax liability arising
on implementation of the Resolution Plan given that a Resolution Plan may often
involve certain write-backs resulting in notional income for the company. The
order in the matter of J.R. Agro Industries Pvt. Limited vs. Swadisht Oils
Pvt. Limited, (Company Application No. 59 of 2018 in CP No. (IB) 13/ALD/2017)
may be referred to, wherein a company application was filed before the AA
(Allahabad Bench) by the RP u/s. 30(6) of the IBC for approval of the
resolution plan as approved by the Committee of Creditors. The AA observed that
“we cannot allow exemption of any liability arising in respect of income tax”.
The NCLT further noted that any statutory liability of the transferor company
shall be the liability of the transferee company and since the income tax
department was not a party to the proceedings, the resolution plan cannot be
approved without giving the department a hearing at this stage. Accordingly,
the resolution professional was asked to modify its resolution plan with a
direction that the same may be re-submitted after getting the plan approved
from the CoC. In this regard, numerous orders of the AA state that a waiver of
statutory dues, if any, can only be done by the appropriate authority by moving
an appropriate application before the statutory authorities.
3.16. IP is expected to
maintain robust documentation during the period he had acted in his role. This
would be more relevant because if there are certain challenges post his
completion of role, he would be expected to demonstrate that he acted in good
faith and with due diligence.
3.17. With the few relaxations and certain
decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it appears that the battle is only half
won with the complexities outpacing the challenges faced. The IBC has been a
landmark legislation and it will continue to evolve.
3.18. While some of the areas
listed above may need more thought and consideration, the issue that IBC deals
with is such that there will always be other unforeseen challenges.
4. ACCOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS
4.1. To begin with, when a company is under the
Resolution Process, if there is a reporting date and the company has to issue
its financial statements, the company will have to consider the following
issues:
4.1.1. Going Concern Assessment: Indian Accounting
Standard (“Ind AS”) 1 Presentation of Financial Statements, requires the
management to make an assessment of going concern while preparing the financial
statements. The company being admitted under the Code is an indicator of
accumulated losses and inability to pay its operational and/or its financial
creditors. Hence, the management of the company will have to carry out a going
concern assessment taking into consideration the stage of the Resolution
Process and its future prospects and decide on the accounting treatment
accordingly.
In cases where it
is likely that the company will be sent under liquidation or it has already
been referred for liquidation before the financial statements have been
approved for issue, the financial statements cannot be prepared using the going
concern assumption. Ind AS 1 does not prescribe the accounting treatment to be
followed in case financial statements are to be prepared on a basis other than
going concern basis. The management will have to decide on appropriate accounting
policies for preparing the accounts depending on the facts and circumstances
and provide detailed disclosures for the basis of preparation of the financial
statements and judgements made in selecting the accounting policies. There will
be a similar requirement under Accounting Standard (“AS”) 1 Disclosure of
Accounting Policies.
4.1.2. Impairment of Assets: AS 28 / Ind AS 36 Impairment
of Assets requires the management to test its tangible and intangible
assets for impairment in case any indicators are identified. When the company
is admitted under a Resolution Process under the Code, it is an indicator for
the management to calculate the recoverable amount for its tangible and
intangible assets and if it is below the carrying amount, an impairment loss will
have to be recognised in the profit and loss.
4.1.3. Additional Disclosures:
There may be several claims made by the creditors on the company which may or
may not match with the liabilities recognised in the financial statements.
Depending on the stage of the Resolution Process, the company will have to
provide detailed disclosures about such claims and also give the expected
financial effect of the same on the financial statement.
4.2. Once the Resolution Process has been approved,
the company under the Code will have to evaluate the following accounting
considerations:
4.2.1. Debt restructuring: There are several ways
in which the existing debt of the company may be restructured with the lenders
as part of the resolution. The accounting will be driven by the terms and
conditions of the agreed restructuring. In case of any full or partial waiver
of principal or interest amount by the lender, the gain on the reduction of the
liability for the company will be recognised in profit and loss as per Ind AS
109 Financial Instruments. There are some exceptions to this rule
provided under Appendix D to Ind AS 109 which the company may have to evaluate.
In case of novation
of the loan to the acquirer or a special purpose vehicle (SPV) formed for the
Resolution Process, the company will have to evaluate whether the same will
qualify for extinguishment of liability from original lender under Ind AS 109.
Ind AS 109 requires
that a substantial modification of the terms of an existing financial
liability, or a part of it, should be accounted for as an extinguishment of the
original financial liability and the recognition of a new financial liability.
A change in lender could significantly alter the future economic risk exposure
of the liability and could be regarded as representing a substantial change
which would lead to derecognition of the original liability.
In that case, the
company will derecognise the existing loan and recognise a new obligation to
the acquirer or the SPV at fair value of the loan with the revised term and the
difference between the carrying value of the extinguished liability and the
fair value of the new loan will have to be recognised in profit and loss.
This credit taken
to the profit and loss may have significant implications on the computation of
MAT.
4.2.2. Other aspects in the Resolution Process:
Depending on the other steps agreed as part of the resolution process, the
company may have to account for any additional equity / debt issued to the
acquirer. If a part of the business is being demerged, the company may have to
evaluate implications under Ind AS 105 non-current assets held for sale and
discontinued operations.
4.3. Depending on the structure finalised under the
Resolution Process, the acquirer will have to evaluate the following possible
accounting implications:
4.3.1. The acquirer will have to apply Ind AS 103 Business
Combinations and give effect to acquisition accounting at fair values of
the net assets acquired depending on the structure agreed – merger, demerger or
reverse merger. For the acquisition accounting, the company will also have to
undertake purchase price allocation of the net assets. This may entail several
accounting complexities as under, depending on the structure of the
transaction:
a. Are there any contingent liabilities of the
company which need to be fair valued?
b. While comparing the net assets acquired and
consideration transferred, normally there should not be a goodwill considering
the circumstances in which the transaction has taken place.
c. If there is a merger of the entities, the
acquirer to evaluate whether the values to be merged will be those appearing in
the standalone financial statements or consolidated financial statements of the
acquiree. There is guidance provided pertaining to this in the Ind AS Transition
Facilitation Group (ITFG) which the company will have to evaluate.
d. Due to fair valuation of
assets and liabilities, there will be changes in the book base and the company
will have to evaluate the consequent impacts on deferred tax balances.
In case the company
is following Indian GAAP, the acquirer will have to evaluate the accounting
treatment as per AS 14 Accounting for Amalgamations, whether pooling of
interest or purchase method will be used to account for the transaction.
4.3.2 Another important consideration is the
year in which this acquisition accounting needs to be done. Based on the
process under IBC and application of Ind AS 103, the same will be done in the
year in which the final approvals for the Resolution Plan have been received
from the NCLT. In case such approval is received after the reporting date, but
before the financial statements are approved for issue, appropriate disclosures
as per Ind AS 10 Events after the Reporting Date will have to be given.
Even after the Resolution Plan has been implemented, the acquirer
and the company will have to be mindful of some of the challenges as mentioned
hereunder:
a. In case the company becomes a subsidiary of
the acquirer, it will have to include the company’s financial statements in its
consolidated financial statements.
b. The acquirer will have to harmonise the
accounting policies, judgements and estimates of the company with its own
policies.
c. The acquirer will also have to evaluate the
Internal Controls over Financial Reporting (ICFR) for the company.
d. Finance function readiness will have to be
evaluated for quarterly and annual reporting, as applicable and compliance with
requirements of Accounting Standards, SEBI requirements and Companies Act.
e. A detailed investor communication will have
to be issued to manage the investor expectations.
Thus, it becomes
critical for both the acquirer and the company under the IBC to be mindful of
the various accounting implications while deciding the overall structure to
arrive at an effective resolution to revive the struggling company.
5. TAX CONSIDERATIONS
5.1. Prior to introduction of IBC,
the Sick Industrial Companies Act (SICA) was enacted to identify sick and
potentially sick companies owning industrial undertakings and for
implementation of suitable measures to revive such companies. Section 32 of the
SICA provided that the scheme made under the SICA would have overriding effect
over other laws in force and basis this provision, it was also possible for a
sick company to obtain customised tax concessions with the consent of the
income tax department through the BIFR scheme approved under SICA. However,
there is no similar provision in the Code. This led to recommendations from the
industry bodies and professional chambers for providing tax concessions under
the Income Tax Act, 1961 (ITA), for companies undergoing Resolution Process.
In deference to the
recommendations and to facilitate the effective implementation of IBC,
amendments were made in the ITA vide Finance Act, 2018 (FA 2018) to facilitate
the rehabilitation of companies undergoing Insolvency Resolution Process.
The following is a
snapshot of the amendments made by FA 2018:
1. Amendment of MAT provisions to provide for
deduction of aggregate of brought-forward book losses and unabsorbed
depreciation.
Provisions of section 115JB of ITA as they existed prior to amendment
by FA 2018 provided for deduction of an amount which is lower than
brought-forward loss and unabsorbed depreciation as per books in computing the
book profits for MAT purposes. FA 2018 inserted Clause (iih) in Explanation 1
to section 115JB(2) to provide a deduction of aggregate of
brought-forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation in case of a company against
whom an application for insolvency proceedings has been admitted under IBC.
2. Carry forward of losses of IBC companies
not to be impacted in case of change in shareholding pursuant to implementation
of Resolution Plan.
Section 79 of the ITA provides that carry forward and set-off of losses
in a closely-held company shall be allowed only if there is a continuity in the
beneficial owner of the shares carrying not less than 51% of the voting power,
on the last day of the year or years in which the loss was incurred.
Implementation of Resolution Plan under IBC for the revival of the insolvent
companies may involve restructuring in the form of mergers, acquisitions,
buy-outs, etc., thus resulting in a change in shareholding of the insolvent
company. Noting that application of section 79 in such cases may act as a
hurdle for the revival of the insolvent companies, FA 2018 amended section 79
to provide that the rigours of section 79 will not apply to change in
shareholding resulting from the implementation of the Resolution Plan under IBC.
3. Resolution professional authorised to
verify the return of income during the Resolution Process.
The return of income filed under the ITA is required to be verified
by the managing director/director of the company. Once an application for
insolvency resolution has been accepted under IBC, the powers of the board of
directors are suspended and the management of the affairs of the company is
handed over to the Resolution Professional. Section 140 of ITA was thus amended
to authorise the Resolution Professional to verify the return of income filed
by the company, in respect of whom an application for corporate insolvency
process has been admitted under IBC.
4. Section 178 – In addition, section 178 of
ITA dealing with responsibilities of a liquidator was amended by IBC (Section
247 of IBC read with the third schedule) to provide that the provisions of
section 178 will apply subject to the other provisions of IBC.
5.2. While the above amendments are welcome, the
following are certain aspects that need consideration/ suitable amendments to
truly enable the revival of insolvent companies.
1. The insertion of clause (iih) is intended
to provide relief to companies undergoing Insolvency Resolution Process by
allowing them full set-off of loss and depreciation instead of the lower of the
two. However, the interpretation of clause (iih) in conjunction with existing
clause (iii) raises number of interpretational issues:
u Which is the first year
in the lifecycle of corporate insolvency process in which clause (iih) will
become applicable?
u Once clause (iih) becomes
applicable, which is the year in which it shall cease to apply? This issue
becomes more crucial in cases where the Resolution Process extends beyond the
270 – day period prescribed under IBC due to litigations.
u If the amount of losses
and unabsorbed depreciation quantified under clause (iih) remains unutilised,
how would such losses and depreciation be carried forward and set off u/s.
115JB? Can both clause (iih) and clause (iii) be applied for a single year?
u A related issue that
arises is whether in case of the merger of an IBC company with another company
pursuant to a Resolution Plan, the amalgamated company can claim benefit of
clause (iih)?
2. MAT relief in respect of sick companies
covered under SICA was governed by clause (vii) of of Explanation 1 to section
115JB. Clause (vii) provides that any profits of a sick industrial company for
the period beginning from the assessment year in which the company qualifies as
a sick industrial company and ending with the assessment year in which the net
worth of the company becomes equal to or exceeds the accumulated losses, needs
to be reduced from ‘book profit’. In other words, profits of a company for the
period during which it qualifies as a sick industrial company under the SICA is
not to be considered for MAT purposes. Clause (vii) is now redundant with the
repeal of SICA.
It is very common for creditors of companies undergoing IBC to take
a haircut (waiver). Such waiver when credited to the profit and loss account is
likely to have a huge MAT impact for the IBC companies. This acts as a hurdle
for the revival of IBC companies. Clause (iih) providing relief to IBC
companies is not as wide in scope as clause (vii) and may not be able to
relieve the MAT impact of such waiver, especially in case of IBC who have
nominal or nil brought-forward losses. Clause (iih) may thus be of no help in
revival of such IBC companies.
3. Whether the benefit of
exclusion from section 79 applies only to change in shareholding of the IBC
company or whether it can apply even to the change in shareholding of
subsidiaries of the IBC company?
4. Whether the Resolution Professional who
verifies the return of income be visited with the consequences of a principal
officer under the Income Tax Act, such as penal consequences for failure in
withholding and payment of tax deducted at source (TDS), filing of TDS return,
etc.?
6. CONCLUSION
While it is
heartening to see that the government is keen to facilitate the implementation
of IBC, there are still many aspects as discussed above, which may need policy
consideration for the IBC to be effective in its true spirit.
Tax is and
continues to be a major factor that will impact and influence various
stakeholders in the IBC process. Despite IBC being hailed as an important
legislative reform to resolve the burgeoning NPA problem in the Indian economy,
if the tax laws are not amended appropriately, it may hinder the growth of the
Indian economy.
