https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374018 The Tribunal dismissed the application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, due to the presence of a pre-existing dispute between the parties before the demand notice and the claim being time-barred. The respondent's allegations of losses stemming from delayed deliveries, coupled with the issuance of the demand notice beyond the limitation period, led to the rejection of the application. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for a genuine dispute and rejected the applicant's arguments, ultimately ruling in favor of the respondent. en-us Mon, 03 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Jan 2019 07:27:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374018 The Tribunal dismissed the application under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, due to the presence of a pre-existing dispute between the parties before the demand notice and the claim being time-barred. The respondent's allegations of losses stemming from delayed deliveries, coupled with the issuance of the demand notice beyond the limitation period, led to the rejection of the application. The Tribunal emphasized the necessity for a genuine dispute and rejected the applicant's arguments, ultimately ruling in favor of the respondent. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 03 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=374018