https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782701 The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's refusal to admit the Section 9 IBC application filed by the operational creditor, holding that there was a genuine pre-existing dispute regarding alleged deficiencies and non-completion of work. The Tribunal noted that the corporate debtor had never acknowledged the claimed dues and had contemporaneously raised objections, as evidenced by email correspondence. Applying the ratio in Mobilox, the Tribunal held that the defence was not a moonshine defence and that such contested issues could not be adjudicated in a summary insolvency proceeding under Section 9. The appeal was dismissed, without prejudice to the creditor's contractual recovery remedies. en-us Mon, 01 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782701 The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority's refusal to admit the Section 9 IBC application filed by the operational creditor, holding that there was a genuine pre-existing dispute regarding alleged deficiencies and non-completion of work. The Tribunal noted that the corporate debtor had never acknowledged the claimed dues and had contemporaneously raised objections, as evidenced by email correspondence. Applying the ratio in Mobilox, the Tribunal held that the defence was not a moonshine defence and that such contested issues could not be adjudicated in a summary insolvency proceeding under Section 9. The appeal was dismissed, without prejudice to the creditor's contractual recovery remedies. Case-Laws IBC Mon, 01 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782701