Регулятор Индии отозвал лицензии у 207 специалистов по банкротству за неэтичное поведение

New Delhi: India’s bankruptcy regulator launched its biggest clean-up yet of the professionals who steer companies through insolvency resolution, cancelling the registrations of 207 insolvency professionals (IPs) in the June quarter for failing to remain “fit and proper”, according to latest official data reviewed Mint. The crackdown is significant as these professionals wield major influence over companies undergoing a rescue process, their assets and creditors, and only 28 had lost their permits on such grounds in all the years since the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) was set up in 2016. Another 15 IPs had to forfeit their registration over these years due to various disciplinary proceedings, showed the regulator’s data. The development comes in the backdrop of some IPs facing heightened scrutiny over corruption and fraud allegations. The latest action brings down the number of such professionals in the country to 4,359 at the end of June, even as eight new IPs got registered during the quarter. Earlier this year, the enforcement directorate (ED) arrested an IP who handled the insolvency resolution of Richa Industries for allegedly acting as a beneficiary of the "proceeds of crime". The ED last month arrested another IP handling the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of Homestead Infrastructure Development and Golden Peacock Residence in connection with a money laundering investigation. The IBBI has regularly been asking insolvency professionals to maintain the highest professional and ethical standards. It has also put in place a code of conduct, which requires an IP to maintain integrity and objectivity, independence and impartiality, professional competence and confidentiality in crucial information. The regulator considers various aspects while determining an IP's “fit and proper” status, including integrity, reputation, character, absence of convictions and restraint orders, competence, and financial solvency. India's IP profession is dominated by chartered accountants, given their expertise in finance matters. They account for about 54% of the IPs, with the rest mostly comprising company secretaries, people with managerial experience, advocates and cost accountants. The professionals who have faced regulatory action can approach the courts for relief. In the document, the regulator cited "failing to fulfil the continuing requirement of 'fit and proper person' status" as the reason for the cancellation of registrations. Analysts say registrations are typically cancelled only after giving the IPs a fair chance to respond. Queries emailed to the IBBI remained unanswered until press time. Need for action According to Anoop Rawat, partner and national practice head (insolvency & restructuring) at Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co, the “fit and proper” requirement functions as a gatekeeping mechanism at the registration stage and as a compliance obligation for an IP’s registration to continue. “A significant number of cancellations may point to either systemic shortcomings in how IPs have discharged their obligations (raising questions about ongoing adherence to ‘fit and proper’ standards) or to gaps in the initial screening process at the time of registration that allowed insufficiently qualified professionals into the fold,” Rawat said. Given the key role of IPs, “it’s very important that their conduct is above board, and no mala fide can ever be attributed to them,” said Ruby Singh Ahuja, senior partner at law firm Karanjawala & Co. “Any illegal action by an IP who handles resolution of a stressed firm makes the plan vulnerable. So, it’s important that the IP is a competent person having high professional standards.” This is a fundamental reset of professional standards in the insolvency profession, reckoned Yogendra Aldak, executive partner at Lakshmikumaran and Sridharan Attorneys. "This sends a pertinent message to the market that holding an IP registration is not, by itself, sufficient. Professional standing must be maintained throughout the tenure," he said. An insolvency professional, Aldak said, is not merely an administrator of a process since the IP exercises a significant influence over the assets of a company, and in many cases, over the interests of the creditors, and other stakeholders. "The regulator, therefore, has a little room for tolerance where questions arise about IP's integrity, competence and ability to discharge that responsibility," he added. Capacity constraints While analysts termed the action against errant professionals as extremely crucial in maintaining the credibility of the insolvency ecosystem, they also underscored the need to consider certain practical aspects. The ecosystem under India's Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) is barely a decade old and it cannot afford to lose experienced professionals faster than it can replace them, Aldak said. "The regulatory clean-up is, therefore, welcome, but it will need to be accompanied by sufficient capacity in the profession," he added. Against this backdrop, remedial measures, and warnings in certain cases, may be initiated for minor breaches by IPs, instead of the cancellation of registrations, reckoned Rawat of Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas. The idea is to ensure that the insolvency ecosystem’s capacity isn't depleted fast, and serious and competent individuals who could make good IPs are not discouraged to take up such roles, he said. The decade-old IBC facilitated the resolution of a total of 1,484 insolvent companies until June 2026, with creditors recovering ₹ 4.35 trillion from stressed assets, or 30.45% of their approved claims. However, the recovery was as high as 94.7% if compared with the fair value of companies when they were admitted for insolvency resolution, based on the data available for 1,359 of them. As many as 1,865 insolvency cases are now undergoing resolution. Call for vigilance In a circular issued late Wednesday, the regulator asked insolvency professionals to remain vigilant to circumstances that indicate any misuse of the resolution process. It has put out an illustrative list of indicators, asking them to exercise caution in cases where the IBC process is launched by a single creditor, other than a bank or a public financial institution, who then goes on to dominate the committee of creditors (CoC) that takes crucial decisions on the rescue of a stressed firm. The IPs should also be careful in cases where a "cluster of corporate debtors with common promoters, addresses, directors, or inter-lending are taken into the CIRP within a proximate timeframe with overlapping CoC composition", it said. The move, the regulator said, comes in the wake of law enforcement and other regulatory agencies flagging the misuse of the IBC for purposes, including mitigation of tax liabilities or avoiding investigations, prosecution and penalties under various statutes.