https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288328 An operational creditor's failure objection on proof of non-receipt was rejected because the record included an ICICI Bank confirmation showing no payment from the corporate debtor's account since the relevant date. However, the section 8 demand notice under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was held invalid because it was issued by an advocate without board authorisation and was not in the prescribed form. The Tribunal applied the statutory scheme and governing appellate precedent to hold that a section 8 notice must be issued by the operational creditor or by a duly authorised person; without that precondition, the section 9 application was incomplete and not maintainable, so the insolvency petition was rejected. en-us Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jun 2020 01:37:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288328 An operational creditor's failure objection on proof of non-receipt was rejected because the record included an ICICI Bank confirmation showing no payment from the corporate debtor's account since the relevant date. However, the section 8 demand notice under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 was held invalid because it was issued by an advocate without board authorisation and was not in the prescribed form. The Tribunal applied the statutory scheme and governing appellate precedent to hold that a section 8 notice must be issued by the operational creditor or by a duly authorised person; without that precondition, the section 9 application was incomplete and not maintainable, so the insolvency petition was rejected. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 15 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288328