Despite the tribunal’s stance, experts and stakeholders, including IBBI Chairman Ravi Mittal, have raised concerns about the lack of clarity regarding the disclosure of Valuation reports. Mittal’s call for collaboration with Registered Valuers Organizations (RVOs) to establish valuation standards highlights the need for a well-reasoned approach that serves the larger public interest.

Legislatively, the IBC emphasizes the importance of maintaining confidentiality in the valuation process, as outlined in Regulation 35(1) and various provisions of the Companies (Registered Valuers and Valuation) Rules, 2017. However, there are arguments in favor of disclosing valuation reports to prospective resolution applicants. Proponents argue that transparency in valuation could instill confidence in potential buyers, leading to better outcomes for all stakeholders involved.

The impact of disclosing valuation reports is a subject of debate. While confidentiality aims to prevent unfair advantages and maximize asset value, leaked reports have been a concern in several cases. Advocates for disclosure argue that it could facilitate fairer negotiations and potentially lead to higher bids, aligning with the objectives of the IBC.

In conclusion, the controversy surrounding the disclosure of valuation reports underscores the complexities of balancing transparency and confidentiality in insolvency proceedings. While the NCLAT’s judgment upholding confidentiality aligns with legislative intent, there are valid arguments in favor of disclosing valuation reports to prospective resolution applicants. Moving forward, a comprehensive approach involving collaboration between regulatory bodies, RVOs, and stakeholders is essential to address these concerns and ensure the efficacy of the insolvency resolution process under the IBC.