IBBI Flags Insolvency Professional for Operating CIRP Account Post-Liquidation, Rejects Procedural Objections [Read Order]
The proceedings will continue to determine the appropriate disciplinary action under Section 220 of the Code.
![IBBI Flags Insolvency Professional for Operating CIRP Account Post-Liquidation, Rejects Procedural Objections [Read Order] IBBI Flags Insolvency Professional for Operating CIRP Account Post-Liquidation, Rejects Procedural Objections [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2026/03/02/2127597-ibbi-flags-insolvency-professional-for-operating-cirp-account-post-liquidationjpg.webp)
The Insolvency andBankruptcy Board of India’s (IBBI) Disciplinary Committee (DC) has dismissed preliminary objections raised by an Insolvency Professional (IP) in proceedings arising from his role as Resolution Professional (RP) in the Corporate InsolvencyResolution Process (CIRP) of Gemus Engineering Limited.
The matter stems from a complaint filed after Anchalia’s tenure as RP ended in December 2024, when the Kolkata Bench of the NCLT ordered liquidation and appointed a new liquidator. The Board examined the complaint, issued a Show Cause Notice (SCN) in September 2025, and referred the matter to the DC.
The insolvency professional said that Regulation 10A of the Inspection Regulations improperly equates complaint processing with investigation, contrary to Sections 218 and 220 of the Code, and he claimed that the SCN was vague, failed to specify possible penalties, and deprived him of a fair chance to respond.
NFRA to Inspect Audits of 35 -40 Companies in FY 26
He contended that the SCN was based only on “prima facie findings of prima facie facts,” without establishing “sufficient cause” under Regulation 11(2), and he questioned the complainant’s standing, noting that the former IRP had no role in liquidation. It was also argued that his actions caused no loss, no unfair gain, and were transparent, pointing to delays by the liquidator in opening the liquidation account.
On the other hand, DC pointed out that Regulation 10A is a procedural mechanism, not a dilution of statutory safeguards. Complaint examination and investigation afforded equal opportunity, so no prejudice was caused.
The DC clarified that Regulation 11(2) requires only a prima facie opinion that sufficient cause exists. Anchalia’s continued operation of the CIRP bank account after liquidation commencement was a clear basis for such opinion, and noted that proceedings are inquisitorial, not adversarial, and any stakeholder or person with an interest may bring facts to the Board’s notice.
As the outcome, the Disciplinary Committee of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), exercising powers under Section 220 of the Code read with Regulation 13 of the Inspection and Investigation Regulations, 2017, suspended the registration of Insolvency Professional Anil Anchalia for two years. The suspension will take effect 30 days from the date of the order.
Accordingly, Whole Time Member Sandip Garg disposed of the Show Cause Notice.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates


