TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 675
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on for condonation of delay. 2. It is submitted that the impugned order was not communicated to the Appellant and he having come to know, filed the appeal on 10th October, 2018. If limitation is counted from the date of knowledge, then there is no delay and otherwise there is a delay of 6 days if it is counted from the date of the impugned order. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the Appellant, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st Respondent- 'Operational Creditor' and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 'Interim Resolution Professional', we hold that there is no delay in preferring the appeal, the Appellant having not been communicated with the order and not being party before the Adjudicating Authority (National C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Kamarhati Kolkata Kolkata WB 700058 IN". It is in the said address, both the notices were issued. Copy of demand notice produced along with the application clearly proves that notice was sent in the above address and copy of track consignment produced in the C.P., proves that notice was delivered to the corporate debtor in the said address. It is significant to note that the demand notice u/s. 8 of the Code was delivered to the corporate debtor's address at Kamarhati. Therefore, the notice to the corporate debtor u/s 8 was served at the registered address of the corporate debtor. So no doubt proper service of demand notice was taken note in this case before filing the application. The service of demand notice under Section 8 was delivered t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Kolkata address which was closed much earlier and was functioning at Bombay, namely- "ESS DEE Aluminium Ltd. at Akurli Road, Kandivali (E), Mumbai- 400 101". This was also known to the 'Operational Creditor' who filed the Interlocutory Application before the Adjudicating Authority showing the address at Mumbai of the 'Corporate Debtor'. 3. It is further submitted that the parties have already settled the matter and as per the settlement, the amount has already been deposited with the Registrar, NCLT, Kolkata Bench. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st Respondent- 'Operational Creditor' accepted that the notice was not served in the Bombay address where the office was functioning. He further submits that they have set....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... notice is actually served on the 'Corporate Debtor' who may act accordingly. For the said reason, the Adjudicating Authority is required to record its satisfaction that the records, including service of demand notice are in order. The Adjudicating Authority is required to satisfy itself that the notice was actually served on the 'Corporate Debtor' not that technically it was served in the address. 9. The Adjudicating Authority having failed to do so, we have no other option but to set aside the order dated 18th June, 2018 and the order dated 4th October, 2018. The parties having settled the matter we are not remitting the matter to the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority will direct the Registrar NCLT, Kolkata Bench to re....