https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444382 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Respondent, finding that the Section 9 petition filed within the limitation period was valid. It dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision to admit the application and initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal determined that there was no genuine pre-existing dispute and that the email acknowledging the debt extended the limitation period. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was instructed to proceed with the CIRP, and the Appellant was ordered to refund Rs.1,10,05,215/-. en-us Wed, 11 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Oct 2023 08:12:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444382 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Respondent, finding that the Section 9 petition filed within the limitation period was valid. It dismissed the appeal, upholding the decision to admit the application and initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal determined that there was no genuine pre-existing dispute and that the email acknowledging the debt extended the limitation period. The Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was instructed to proceed with the CIRP, and the Appellant was ordered to refund Rs.1,10,05,215/-. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 11 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444382