https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776150 The NCLAT held that the principal employer cannot be treated as the debtor under Section 9 of the IBC where there is no privity of contract with the sub-contractor. The contractor bears the primary responsibility for payment, and the principal employer's payments made on behalf of the contractor must be reimbursed by the contractor. The tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent confirming that the principal employer is not liable to pay the sub-contractor directly. Given the absence of contractual privity and a pre-existing dispute over account reconciliation between the sub-contractor and contractor, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the impugned order. en-us Fri, 01 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Aug 2025 08:19:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776150 The NCLAT held that the principal employer cannot be treated as the debtor under Section 9 of the IBC where there is no privity of contract with the sub-contractor. The contractor bears the primary responsibility for payment, and the principal employer's payments made on behalf of the contractor must be reimbursed by the contractor. The tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent confirming that the principal employer is not liable to pay the sub-contractor directly. Given the absence of contractual privity and a pre-existing dispute over account reconciliation between the sub-contractor and contractor, the appeal was dismissed, upholding the impugned order. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 01 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776150