https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426181 An advocate-signed demand notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as valid when issued on behalf of an operational creditor, as the statutory scheme permits notice through counsel. The Section 9 application was rejected as incomplete because it lacked the supporting material required to establish debt, default and non-payment, including basic transaction and bank records. The tribunal also accepted that insolvency proceedings are a resolution mechanism and not a debt recovery device, and that admission may be refused where the process is invoked for an improper recovery purpose, including in relation to a viable going concern. The dismissal of the Section 9 application was affirmed. en-us Fri, 05 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2022 21:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426181 An advocate-signed demand notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was treated as valid when issued on behalf of an operational creditor, as the statutory scheme permits notice through counsel. The Section 9 application was rejected as incomplete because it lacked the supporting material required to establish debt, default and non-payment, including basic transaction and bank records. The tribunal also accepted that insolvency proceedings are a resolution mechanism and not a debt recovery device, and that admission may be refused where the process is invoked for an improper recovery purpose, including in relation to a viable going concern. The dismissal of the Section 9 application was affirmed. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 05 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426181