https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93528 NCLAT dismisses the appeal and upholds the NCLT's admission of the Section 9 petition. The Tribunal held that the OC proved an operational debt and default as defined under Sections 5(21) and 3(12) of the IBC: Rs.1 crore constituted advance consideration, goods were not supplied and no refund was made, and the CD's financial statements repeatedly acknowledged the liability. That acknowledgment in the CD's balance sheet extended limitation to 31.03.2025, rendering the Section 9 filing on 23.06.2023 time-bar compliant. Alleged pre-existing dispute was held not bona fide under the Mobilox test; unilateral NeSL marking and a belated police complaint did not rebut the OC's case. The AA's admission order was affirmed. en-us Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:56 +0530 Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93528 NCLAT dismisses the appeal and upholds the NCLT's admission of the Section 9 petition. The Tribunal held that the OC proved an operational debt and default as defined under Sections 5(21) and 3(12) of the IBC: Rs.1 crore constituted advance consideration, goods were not supplied and no refund was made, and the CD's financial statements repeatedly acknowledged the liability. That acknowledgment in the CD's balance sheet extended limitation to 31.03.2025, rendering the Section 9 filing on 23.06.2023 time-bar compliant. Alleged pre-existing dispute was held not bona fide under the Mobilox test; unilateral NeSL marking and a belated police complaint did not rebut the OC's case. The AA's admission order was affirmed. Highlights IBC Sat, 25 Oct 2025 09:00:56 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93528