Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Unpaid supply dues arising under a separate inter se agreement between joint venture partners constituted operational debt, because the contractual documents specifically allocated the supply obligation to the respondent and made payment contingent on receipt from OPTCL; the corporate debtor's acknowledgment of the balance payable confirmed liability, so admission of the Section 9 application was justified. The Section 10A objection failed because no factual foundation was laid below and the pleaded default date fell outside the protected period, making the statutory bar inapplicable. No pre-existing dispute was shown, as the correspondence relied on reflected acknowledgment of liability rather than a genuine dispute.
Unpaid supply dues arising under a separate inter se agreement between joint venture partners constituted operational debt, because the contractual documents specifically allocated the supply obligation to the respondent and made payment contingent on receipt from OPTCL; the corporate debtor's acknowledgment of the balance payable confirmed liability, so admission of the Section 9 application was justified. The Section 10A objection failed because no factual foundation was laid below and the pleaded default date fell outside the protected period, making the statutory bar inapplicable. No pre-existing dispute was shown, as the correspondence relied on reflected acknowledgment of liability rather than a genuine dispute.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
