https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752573 The NCLAT dismissed an operational creditor's appeal seeking to initiate CIRP against a corporate debtor. While the NCLAT held that the appellant qualified as an operational creditor under IBC due to advance payment for goods supply, it found a pre-existing contractual dispute existed between parties regarding delivery terms and transportation obligations. The appellant had misled authorities about delivery location (claiming Hong Kong instead of actual Ex-plant Rajkot terms). Since the dispute predated the demand notice under Section 8 IBC, citing Mobilox Innovations precedent, the CIRP application was properly rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. en-us Mon, 06 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 13 May 2024 17:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752573 The NCLAT dismissed an operational creditor's appeal seeking to initiate CIRP against a corporate debtor. While the NCLAT held that the appellant qualified as an operational creditor under IBC due to advance payment for goods supply, it found a pre-existing contractual dispute existed between parties regarding delivery terms and transportation obligations. The appellant had misled authorities about delivery location (claiming Hong Kong instead of actual Ex-plant Rajkot terms). Since the dispute predated the demand notice under Section 8 IBC, citing Mobilox Innovations precedent, the CIRP application was properly rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 06 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752573