https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346195 The alleged liability was not treated as a bona fide disputed debt because the respondent repeatedly acknowledged the outstanding balance, sought time for remittance, and did not dispute the invoices, bills of lading, certificate of origin, or debit note. Its later claim that the payments were investments or part of a business arrangement was found inconsistent with earlier emails and unsupported by contemporaneous records. The respondent's balance-sheet material also identified the petitioner as a creditor during the relevant period, while the later entry showing the petitioner as a debtor was viewed as an afterthought. The company petition was admitted. en-us Fri, 04 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Aug 2017 11:20:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346195 The alleged liability was not treated as a bona fide disputed debt because the respondent repeatedly acknowledged the outstanding balance, sought time for remittance, and did not dispute the invoices, bills of lading, certificate of origin, or debit note. Its later claim that the payments were investments or part of a business arrangement was found inconsistent with earlier emails and unsupported by contemporaneous records. The respondent's balance-sheet material also identified the petitioner as a creditor during the relevant period, while the later entry showing the petitioner as a debtor was viewed as an afterthought. The company petition was admitted. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 04 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346195