<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (6) TMI 48 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , HYDERABAD BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423207</link>
    <description>Invoices, delivery challans, an undisputed ledger account, part-payment by cheque, and no specific denial in reply to the demand notice were treated as sufficient to establish operational debt and default under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The documentary record also showed that the goods were supplied to the corporate debtor, including invoices bearing its TIN and proof of GST payment, so the objection that no goods were received was rejected. The last supply, the cheque issued in partial discharge, and the corporate debtor&#039;s statement before the High Court were treated as acknowledgement of liability, which restarted limitation under the Limitation Act and kept the application within time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2022 08:41:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=680817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (6) TMI 48 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , HYDERABAD BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423207</link>
      <description>Invoices, delivery challans, an undisputed ledger account, part-payment by cheque, and no specific denial in reply to the demand notice were treated as sufficient to establish operational debt and default under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The documentary record also showed that the goods were supplied to the corporate debtor, including invoices bearing its TIN and proof of GST payment, so the objection that no goods were received was rejected. The last supply, the cheque issued in partial discharge, and the corporate debtor&#039;s statement before the High Court were treated as acknowledgement of liability, which restarted limitation under the Limitation Act and kept the application within time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423207</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>