<?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>2026 (3) TMI 1325 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788570</link>
    <description>A section 9 insolvency application was found unsustainable because the corporate debtor&#039;s reply to the demand notice amounted to a valid notice of dispute under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The reply specifically disputed the invoices, alleged non-supply and fake billing, and referred to return of materials and prior audit/investigation, showing a pre-existing controversy. The defence was held not to be spurious or moonshine because the record disclosed a plausible, material dispute requiring further examination. A later GST assessment order was also treated as relevant corroboration, as it reflected duplicate invoices, lack of vehicle movement, and invoices raised without actual supply.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2026 16:50:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=892768" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (3) TMI 1325 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788570</link>
      <description>A section 9 insolvency application was found unsustainable because the corporate debtor&#039;s reply to the demand notice amounted to a valid notice of dispute under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The reply specifically disputed the invoices, alleged non-supply and fake billing, and referred to return of materials and prior audit/investigation, showing a pre-existing controversy. The defence was held not to be spurious or moonshine because the record disclosed a plausible, material dispute requiring further examination. A later GST assessment order was also treated as relevant corroboration, as it reflected duplicate invoices, lack of vehicle movement, and invoices raised without actual supply.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788570</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>