Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
Extended period of limitation unsustainable; allowable deductions for prompt payment discounts, pro rata recovery, freight and VAT led to demand being...
The Tribunal held that homebuyers as a class of creditors met the quantitative threshold for initiating a Section 7 application because the corporate debtor's developed-share entitlement produced sufficient allotted units; therefore the Section 7 petition should not have been dismissed on threshold grounds. The Tribunal treated the development agreement allocation (18% share) and actual units sold by the corporate debtor as relevant to eligibility at filing, and concluded the threshold is assessed at filing rather than later-consequence: remand to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal also noted maintainability of proceedings against related landowner/developer parties forming the same project and recorded ex parte conduct by the corporate debtor, without deciding merits.
The Tribunal held that homebuyers as a class of creditors met the quantitative threshold for initiating a Section 7 application because the corporate debtor's developed-share entitlement produced sufficient allotted units; therefore the Section 7 petition should not have been dismissed on threshold grounds. The Tribunal treated the development agreement allocation (18% share) and actual units sold by the corporate debtor as relevant to eligibility at filing, and concluded the threshold is assessed at filing rather than later-consequence: remand to the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal also noted maintainability of proceedings against related landowner/developer parties forming the same project and recorded ex parte conduct by the corporate debtor, without deciding merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.