https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422614 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the validity of a financial debt claimed by Respondent No. 1. The Appellants' argument that the amount was part of an investment, not a loan, was unsupported. The Information Utility's records confirmed the loan with interest. The Tribunal noted the lack of response from the Appellants to correct the record, leading to deemed authentication of the debt. It emphasized the inconsistency of claiming a fresh investment without the company's authorized share capital supporting it. Citing legal precedent, the Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision to admit the Section 7 application, dismissing the appeal without costs. en-us Wed, 18 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 May 2022 08:30:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422614 The Tribunal dismissed the appeal challenging the validity of a financial debt claimed by Respondent No. 1. The Appellants' argument that the amount was part of an investment, not a loan, was unsupported. The Information Utility's records confirmed the loan with interest. The Tribunal noted the lack of response from the Appellants to correct the record, leading to deemed authentication of the debt. It emphasized the inconsistency of claiming a fresh investment without the company's authorized share capital supporting it. Citing legal precedent, the Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision to admit the Section 7 application, dismissing the appeal without costs. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 18 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422614