https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401568 The Tribunal dismissed the application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiation under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. It found a pre-existing dispute regarding the quality of goods supplied by the Applicant, making the application not maintainable. Despite the Applicant's evidence of serving the demand notice at the registered address, the Tribunal sided with the Respondent, who contested the validity of the notice. The decision clarified that the rejection did not prejudice the Applicant's rights to seek alternative remedies. The Tribunal affirmed jurisdiction based on the Respondent's New Delhi office location, without expressing an opinion on the underlying dispute's merits. en-us Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 11 Dec 2020 12:33:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401568 The Tribunal dismissed the application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiation under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. It found a pre-existing dispute regarding the quality of goods supplied by the Applicant, making the application not maintainable. Despite the Applicant's evidence of serving the demand notice at the registered address, the Tribunal sided with the Respondent, who contested the validity of the notice. The decision clarified that the rejection did not prejudice the Applicant's rights to seek alternative remedies. The Tribunal affirmed jurisdiction based on the Respondent's New Delhi office location, without expressing an opinion on the underlying dispute's merits. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 27 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401568