https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784516 The dominant issue was whether the operational debt pleaded in a s.9 IBC application crossed the statutory threshold where the claim involved alleged double charging of licence fee and amenities and disputes arising from termination of leave and licence and amenities arrangements after expiry of a lock-in period. NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority erred by not thoroughly examining the parties' issues and by failing to compute the actual payable amount to determine threshold eligibility. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to re-decide the s.9 application by a reasoned speaking order; the appeal was allowed by way of remand. en-us Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jan 2026 08:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784516 The dominant issue was whether the operational debt pleaded in a s.9 IBC application crossed the statutory threshold where the claim involved alleged double charging of licence fee and amenities and disputes arising from termination of leave and licence and amenities arrangements after expiry of a lock-in period. NCLAT held that the Adjudicating Authority erred by not thoroughly examining the parties' issues and by failing to compute the actual payable amount to determine threshold eligibility. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the Adjudicating Authority to re-decide the s.9 application by a reasoned speaking order; the appeal was allowed by way of remand. Case-Laws IBC Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784516