https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781138 For invoice-based operational debt claims, Form 4 need not separately state the date of default, so omission of that date in the demand notice is not fatal to section 9 proceedings. The text also notes that limitation should not be computed mechanically from each invoice date where the invoices contemplate payment on demand with delayed-payment interest, and that rejection under section 9(5)(ii) must rest only on the statutory grounds for refusal. A curable defect cannot be treated as a substantive bar. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration of the section 9 application on merits. en-us Fri, 24 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781138 For invoice-based operational debt claims, Form 4 need not separately state the date of default, so omission of that date in the demand notice is not fatal to section 9 proceedings. The text also notes that limitation should not be computed mechanically from each invoice date where the invoices contemplate payment on demand with delayed-payment interest, and that rejection under section 9(5)(ii) must rest only on the statutory grounds for refusal. A curable defect cannot be treated as a substantive bar. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration of the section 9 application on merits. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 24 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781138