IBBI Caps Individual Insolvency Professionals at 10 Active Cases, Bars New Assignments for those Over Limit [Read Notification]

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) through a notification issued on 20 th November introduced new regulations aimed at enhancing the efficiency and quality of the insolvency resolution process.

The most notable change, outlined in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Professionals) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2025, is a strict cap on the number of assignments an individual insolvency professional can undertake.

Under the newly inserted Regulation 7B, an individual insolvency professional is now barred from handling more than ten assignments in aggregate at any given time. This cumulative limit includes roles served as an interim resolution professional, a resolution professional in a corporate insolvency resolution process, and as a liquidator in a liquidation process.

Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here

Furthermore, the regulation introduces a sub-cap, stipulating that of these ten assignments, no more than three can involve cases with admitted claims exceeding ₹1,000 crore each. This measure is designed to prevent individual professionals from becoming overburdened, particularly with high-value and complex cases, thereby ensuring they can dedicate adequate time and resources to each assignment.

To manage the transition, the regulations include a specific provision for professionals already exceeding these limits. Any individual insolvency professional who is holding more assignments than the new threshold on the date the regulations come into force is immediately prohibited from accepting any new assignments. They will only be eligible to take on new work once their number of ongoing assignments falls below the specified limit, ensuring a gradual and orderly compliance with the new norms.

Beyond the assignment cap, the Second Amendment Regulations also modify the Code of Conduct for Insolvency Professionals. A key change in Clause 6 shifts the accountability for certain actions, replacing the requirement for "the approval of the Board" with the need for "the prior approval of the Adjudicating Authority."

This change likely streamlines the approval process by vesting it directly in the authority overseeing the specific case. Additionally, a clarification previously attached to clause 22 of the Code of Conduct has been omitted, as per the new notification.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates