Forensic audits have become one of the most critical—and controversial—components of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in India. Intended to uncover diversion of funds, preferential payments, undervaluation, and fraud, these audits often determine the fate of avoidance applications and influence the confidence of resolution applicants.
But in practice, forensic audits frequently cause delays, spark disputes, and reduce resolution value. As insolvency cases grow more complex, the need for timely, accurate, and legally compliant forensic examinations has never been more urgent.
Here is a deep dive into the delays, legal challenges, and value impact of forensic audits in CIRP.
1. Why Are Forensic Audits Needed in CIRP?
Under Sections 43 to 51 and 66 of the IBC, RPs must examine whether the corporate debtor engaged in:
- Preferential transactions
- Undervalued transactions
- Fraudulent trading
- Extortionate credit
- Fund diversion
Given limited time and operational complexity, RPs rely on forensic auditors to identify transactions that may require avoidance applications.
A good forensic audit strengthens the RP’s ability to recover value and hold wrongdoers accountable.
2. Ground Reality: Why Forensic Audits Get Delayed
Despite their importance, forensic audits rarely finish within the standard CIRP timeline. Key reasons include:
a) Missing or Manipulated Books
Promoters often fail to hand over complete data, including:
- Trial balances
- Bank statements
- Ledgers
- Inventory records
- GST data
- ERP/password access
Without this, auditors cannot proceed.
b) Multiple Data Sources & Poor Quality
Large companies have data across:
- Branches
- Depots
- Legacy ERPs
- Manual registers
- External consultants
Reconciliation becomes a long exercise.
c) Litigation by Promoters
Promoters often challenge:
- Scope
- Auditor appointment
- Transaction periods
- Methodology
This stalls the process.
d) Late Appointment of Forensic Auditors
Some CoCs approve audits months after CIRP begins, leaving insufficient time for proper examination.
e) Limited NCLT Support for Data Recovery
RPs struggle to obtain timely court orders for:
- Access to premises
- Data recovery
- Seizure of documents
- Summoning ex-employees
This further delays work.
3. Legal Issues Associated With Forensic Audits
a) Scope of Work Disputes
CoC members often insist on wide-ranging audits covering several years, causing delays and cost escalation.
b) Admissibility of Findings
Forensic reports must withstand scrutiny under NCLT and NCLAT, including:
- evidence admissibility standards
- independence of auditors
- chain of custody of data
Poorly drafted reports weaken avoidance applications.
c) Conflict of Interest Concerns
If the same firm handles valuation, transaction audits, or advisory roles, objections may arise.
d) Challenges Under Principles of Natural Justice
Respondents often claim:
- lack of opportunity to respond
- inadequate notice
- incorrect interpretation of transactions
This triggers litigation.
e) Time-barred Transactions
Transactions older than the look-back period (1–2 years under IBC) create debate and confusion.
4. Impact on Resolution Value
Forensic audits significantly influence how bidders perceive the company’s risks.
a) Delayed Reports = Fewer Serious Resolution Applicants
Bidders hesitate when:
- forensic red flags are pending
- avoidance claims may affect future liability
- debt claims may get revised
- material information is incomplete
This leads to lower valuations.
b) Negative Findings Reduce Confidence
If forensic reports suggest:
- fund diversion
- related-party transactions
- asset stripping
- false invoicing
then bidders price in heavy risk discounts.
c) Increased Litigation = Lower Bids
Bidders prefer companies with clear, undisputed claims. Unresolved forensic issues often push companies toward liquidation.
d) Late Submission of Reports Affect CoC Decisions
If key findings come near the end of CIRP, lenders may struggle to:
- evaluate resolution plans
- modify strategy
- apply Section 29A disqualifications
Value erosion follows.
5. Case Study Snapshot: The Real Impact
Case Example (Anonymised)
A mid-sized manufacturing company had:
- 8 years of incomplete books
- 42 related-party entities
- Missing warehouse records
The forensic audit took 4 months, during which:
- two bidders withdrew
- CoC had to extend CIRP
- value reduced by 35%
Eventually, liquidation became inevitable.
6. What the Ecosystem Needs to Fix This
a) Mandatory Data Handover Within 7 Days
With penalties for non-cooperation.
b) Standardised Forensic Audit Templates
Defined timelines, methodology, reporting formats.
c) Digital Data Access via MCA + GST + Banks
To eliminate dependence on promoters.
d) Dedicated Avoidance Transaction Benches
To dispose cases within 180 days.
e) Early Decision by CoC on Forensic Scope
No last-minute approvals.
f) AI-Based Transaction Screening Tools
To reduce manual audits and accelerate analysis.
Conclusion: Forensics Are Necessary — But Need Reform
Forensic audits are essential for identifying fraud, recovering value, and strengthening the integrity of the insolvency process. But without timeliness, clarity, and enforcement support, they can become a bottleneck that reduces value rather than protecting it. India’s 2025 IBC reforms need to focus on:
- faster forensic processes
- stronger data access protocols
- better legal enforceability
- early-stage case triaging
A reformed forensic audit ecosystem can significantly improve recovery outcomes and reduce liquidation rates.
*****
Author Note: The author is an Insolvency Resolution Professional with extensive experience in managing multiple CIRP and liquidation assignments. For queries or professional discussions related to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), you may reach out to: Krit Narayan Mishra at kritmassociates@gmail.com | +91 99108 59116.
Author Bio
