https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782574 The NCLAT held that service of a demand notice under Section 8 IBC is a condition precedent for initiating CIRP under Section 9, but found that the NCLT erred in summarily rejecting the operational creditor's petition solely on alleged non-service of the notice dated 18 March 2024. The Tribunal observed that where there is doubt regarding service, especially via email, the adjudicating authority must afford the creditor an opportunity to produce evidence rather than dismiss the petition outright. Consequently, the impugned order rejecting the Section 9 application was set aside, and the matter was remanded to NCLT, Ahmedabad for fresh adjudication on merits after granting reasonable opportunity to lead evidence. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Dec 2025 08:35:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782574 The NCLAT held that service of a demand notice under Section 8 IBC is a condition precedent for initiating CIRP under Section 9, but found that the NCLT erred in summarily rejecting the operational creditor's petition solely on alleged non-service of the notice dated 18 March 2024. The Tribunal observed that where there is doubt regarding service, especially via email, the adjudicating authority must afford the creditor an opportunity to produce evidence rather than dismiss the petition outright. Consequently, the impugned order rejecting the Section 9 application was set aside, and the matter was remanded to NCLT, Ahmedabad for fresh adjudication on merits after granting reasonable opportunity to lead evidence. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 27 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782574