https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787286 Where the existence of a High Court decree was not in dispute, the Tribunal examined the disputed quantification of the balance due by considering prior payments, surrounding material from income tax proceedings, and the claimant's earlier inconsistent computations. It treated those materials as relevant to testing the reliability of the rival figures and declined to accept the lender's computation chart at face value because several payments were not reflected and the lender's own earlier stand was inconsistent. The quantified liability was therefore treated as a disputed issue to be addressed in the pending proceedings before the Supreme Court and the High Court. en-us Thu, 26 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Mar 2026 08:34:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787286 Where the existence of a High Court decree was not in dispute, the Tribunal examined the disputed quantification of the balance due by considering prior payments, surrounding material from income tax proceedings, and the claimant's earlier inconsistent computations. It treated those materials as relevant to testing the reliability of the rival figures and declined to accept the lender's computation chart at face value because several payments were not reflected and the lender's own earlier stand was inconsistent. The quantified liability was therefore treated as a disputed issue to be addressed in the pending proceedings before the Supreme Court and the High Court. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 26 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787286