<?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>Dispute Over Unpaid Dues for e-Auction Solutions Dismissed; No Default Without Third-Party Auditor Certification.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83024</link>
    <description>The dispute revolves around the non-payment of outstanding dues by the Corporate Debtor to the Appellant, pursuant to an agreement for providing e-Auction solutions. The agreement mandated certification by a Third-Party Auditor (TPA) for release of quarterly payments. However, the TPA was not appointed by the Government, resulting in non-payment. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the Section 9 application filed by the Appellant, holding that no default occurred as the non-payment was due to the contractual requirement of TPA certification. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection, stating that while the Government&#039;s inaction caused prejudice to the Appellant, the Corporate Debtor cannot be subjected to insolvency proceedings when the agreement prescribed a specific payment mechanism. The Appellant retains the remedy to recover dues through appropriate means under the agreement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2024 08:52:50 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2024 08:52:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Dispute Over Unpaid Dues for e-Auction Solutions Dismissed; No Default Without Third-Party Auditor Certification.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83024</link>
      <description>The dispute revolves around the non-payment of outstanding dues by the Corporate Debtor to the Appellant, pursuant to an agreement for providing e-Auction solutions. The agreement mandated certification by a Third-Party Auditor (TPA) for release of quarterly payments. However, the TPA was not appointed by the Government, resulting in non-payment. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the Section 9 application filed by the Appellant, holding that no default occurred as the non-payment was due to the contractual requirement of TPA certification. The Appellate Tribunal upheld the rejection, stating that while the Government&#039;s inaction caused prejudice to the Appellant, the Corporate Debtor cannot be subjected to insolvency proceedings when the agreement prescribed a specific payment mechanism. The Appellant retains the remedy to recover dues through appropriate means under the agreement.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2024 08:52:50 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=83024</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>