https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775141 NCLAT Principal Bench set aside the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of a Section 9 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The lower tribunal had rejected the application citing pre-existing disputes regarding non-delivery and inferior quality of goods across three invoices. NCLAT held that debt and default were established as acknowledged in ledger accounts and supported by GST benefits claimed by both parties. Relying on Mobilox Innovations precedent, the tribunal ruled that while pre-existing disputes can relate to quality, quantity, or counter-claims raised before demand notice, they should not constitute "moonshine defense." The Adjudicating Authority erred by treating the corporate debtor as financially solvent without recording proper details and failed to admit the application despite established debt and default. The appeal was allowed and impugned order set aside. en-us Thu, 03 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Jul 2025 08:43:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775141 NCLAT Principal Bench set aside the Adjudicating Authority's rejection of a Section 9 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The lower tribunal had rejected the application citing pre-existing disputes regarding non-delivery and inferior quality of goods across three invoices. NCLAT held that debt and default were established as acknowledged in ledger accounts and supported by GST benefits claimed by both parties. Relying on Mobilox Innovations precedent, the tribunal ruled that while pre-existing disputes can relate to quality, quantity, or counter-claims raised before demand notice, they should not constitute "moonshine defense." The Adjudicating Authority erred by treating the corporate debtor as financially solvent without recording proper details and failed to admit the application despite established debt and default. The appeal was allowed and impugned order set aside. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 03 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775141