<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Plausible Contention Test upheld: petition dismissal affirmed where a bona fide pre-existing dispute required further investigation.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97325</link>
    <description>Tribunal affirmed the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s rejection of an insolvency petition on the ground that the Corporate Debtor had raised a bona fide pre-existing dispute prior to the demand notice. Applying the plausible contention test, the Tribunal held the debtor&#039;s pre-demand communication denying privity, seeking detailed transaction particulars, and the invoices&#039; lack of corroborative customer/delivery data amounted to a dispute requiring further investigation and not a patently spurious defence; accordingly the petition was correctly dismissed as barred by the pre-existing dispute doctrine.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 15:15:36 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 15:15:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=888668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Plausible Contention Test upheld: petition dismissal affirmed where a bona fide pre-existing dispute required further investigation.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97325</link>
      <description>Tribunal affirmed the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s rejection of an insolvency petition on the ground that the Corporate Debtor had raised a bona fide pre-existing dispute prior to the demand notice. Applying the plausible contention test, the Tribunal held the debtor&#039;s pre-demand communication denying privity, seeking detailed transaction particulars, and the invoices&#039; lack of corroborative customer/delivery data amounted to a dispute requiring further investigation and not a patently spurious defence; accordingly the petition was correctly dismissed as barred by the pre-existing dispute doctrine.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 15:15:36 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>