Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal Dismisses CIRP Application Due to Genuine Dispute</h1> <h3>C.S. Srinivasan and Ors. Versus Pentafour Products Ltd.</h3> The Tribunal dismissed the application to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, ... Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its debt - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT:- The Operational Creditor themselves have filed a Writ Appeal against the 12(3) Settlement arrived at between the parties, which goes on to show that there exists a dispute. There is a genuine dispute between the parties and the defence raised by the Corporate Debtor on the grounds of existence of a dispute are real and not spurious, hypothetical, illusory or misconceived. Petition dismissed. Issues Involved:1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.2. Existence of a 'dispute' between the parties before the issuance of the Demand Notice.3. Binding nature of the 12(3) Settlement under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947.4. Finality of the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour regarding gratuity claims.Detailed Analysis:1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016:The application was filed by 20 individuals, retired employees of the Corporate Debtor, seeking to initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor under Section 9 of the IBC, 2016. They claimed an operational debt of Rs. 67,68,368/- based on orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The application included details of the Corporate Debtor's incorporation, authorized capital, and registered office.2. Existence of a 'dispute' between the parties before the issuance of the Demand Notice:The Tribunal needed to determine if a 'dispute' existed before the issuance of the Demand Notice under Section 8 of the IBC, 2016. The Corporate Debtor argued that the claims were over and above the 12(3) Settlement amount and were subject to a pending Writ Petition (W.P. No. 9014/2017). The Operational Creditors contended that they were not parties to the said Writ Petition and that the orders by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour had attained finality since they were not challenged by the Corporate Debtor.3. Binding nature of the 12(3) Settlement under the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947:The Corporate Debtor argued that the Operational Creditors were part of the 12(3) Settlement dated 19.04.2006, which was binding and any claims over and above the settlement were disputed. The Operational Creditors countered that the binding nature of the 12(3) Settlement was under challenge in a Writ Appeal (W.A. No. 2115/2012) before the Madras High Court, and thus, the Corporate Debtor was still obligated to pay the gratuity as directed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour.4. Finality of the orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour regarding gratuity claims:The Operational Creditors argued that the orders by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour dated 14.03.2017, 19.07.2018, and 25.07.2018 had not been challenged by the Corporate Debtor and thus had attained finality. The Corporate Debtor, however, highlighted that the existence of a dispute was evident from the pending Writ Appeal challenging the 12(3) Settlement, which included most of the petitioners.Judgment:The Tribunal concluded that a genuine dispute existed between the parties, as the Operational Creditors themselves had filed a Writ Appeal against the 12(3) Settlement. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kirusa Software (P) Limited, the Tribunal emphasized that the existence of a dispute must be pre-existing before the receipt of the Demand Notice. The Tribunal found the dispute to be real and not spurious, hypothetical, illusory, or misconceived. Consequently, the petition was dismissed without costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found