https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295472 The Tribunal admitted the application filed by the operational creditor under Sec.9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against the corporate debtor. A moratorium was declared, and an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed to conduct the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The Tribunal rejected the contentions that the outstanding debt did not qualify as a claim, that unpaid lease rent was not an operational debt, and that insufficiency of stamp duty rendered the lease agreement unenforceable. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the counterclaims of the corporate debtor for costs incurred on interior/furnishing and loss of business. en-us Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jun 2021 10:39:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295472 The Tribunal admitted the application filed by the operational creditor under Sec.9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, against the corporate debtor. A moratorium was declared, and an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed to conduct the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The Tribunal rejected the contentions that the outstanding debt did not qualify as a claim, that unpaid lease rent was not an operational debt, and that insufficiency of stamp duty rendered the lease agreement unenforceable. Additionally, the Tribunal dismissed the counterclaims of the corporate debtor for costs incurred on interior/furnishing and loss of business. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 01 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295472