TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (6) TMI 395
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appoint Interim Resolution Professional. 2. Part-I of the Application sets out about the Operational Creditor from which, it is evident that the Operational Creditor is a Private Limited Company. Part-Il of the Application gives all the particulars of the Corporate Debtor from which it is evident that the Corporate Debtor is a Private Limited Company with CIN:U72100TN2009PTC073271 which was incorporated on 20.10.2009 and that its Authorized share capital and paid up capital is Rs. 1,00,00,000.00 and Rs. 93,00,,000.00 respectively. The Registered Office of the Corporate Debtor as per the Application is stated to be situated at F-7, 1 st Floor, K.A.J. Plaza, No. 7, Narasingapuram Street, Mount Road, Chennai - 600 002. 3. Part-III of the Application shows that the Operational Creditor has not proposed the name of the "Interim Resolution Professional" (IRP) and left it to the discretion of this Tribunal to appoint the same. From Part-IV of the Application, it is seen that a sum of Rs. 42,19,22/- along with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. amounting to Rs. 19,15,503/- cumulatively aggregating to Rs. 61,34,725/- is being claimed as total debt which is due and payable by the Corporate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Corporate Debtor nor has the Corporate Debtor brought to the notice of the Operational Creditor any dispute in relation to the amounts claimed by the Operational Creditor. 9. The Corporate Debtor has filed its reply and submitted that the Operational Creditor has suppressed many facts before this Tribunal. It was submitted that the Operational Creditor has made an offer in May 2011 and assured various benefits including the trips to the United Kingdom and United States of America, if the Corporate Debtor buys Microsoft products from the Operational Creditor and based on such assurance, the Corporate Debtor purchased lot of products from the Operational Creditor. Thereafter, the Operational Creditor had offered 5 tickets for the United Kingdom Trip and 4 tickets for the United States of America trips and in total, 9 tickets worth about Rs. 27 Lakhs inclusive of travel, food and accommodation and other expenses and it is stated that the Operational Creditor has received the costs of these tickets from Microsoft. 10. The Learned Counsel for the Corporate Debtor submitted that the Operational Creditor has failed to issue 9 tickets to the Corporate Debtor even after repeated mails se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ickets as claimed, it per-se would not relieve the Corporate Debtor of its obligation to pay for the goods. The Learned Counsel for the Operational Creditor referred to the e-mail dated 02.11.2018 wherein the understanding between the parties was that the Corporate Debtor was required to pay the amounts due to the Operational Creditor irrespective of whether the Corporate Debtor was entitled to the benefit of the alleged scheme or otherwise. 15. The Learned Counsel for the Operational Creditor further contended that the Schemes annexed by the Corporate Debtor would demonstrate that the Operational Creditor holds no responsibility towards rejection of visas and that no alternative would be provided if the visas stood rejected. It is pertinent to note here that that the visa of the Corporate Debtor was rejected twice for the trip to UK. Hence, the representative of the Corporate Debtor voluntarily cancelled the other trip to which they claim they were entitled and the same is apparent from the emails sent by the Corporate Debtor. Thus, it was contended that the Corporate Debtor, having defaulted on its payments, has now attempted to raise this issue as an afterthought only in order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arties. Even assuming for a moment that the said sum of Rs. 27 Lakhs has to be given credit to the account of the Corporate Debtor, the Corporate Debtor in their own counter has admitted that still a sum of Rs. 16,81,987/- is due and payable to the Operational Creditor. Thus, it may be seen that the debt and default on the part of the Corporate Debtor is proved and the defence raised by the Corporate Debtor are spurious, illusory and hypothetical. 19. The Operational Creditor has also filed Affidavit as mandated under Section 9(3)(b) of IBC, 2016 wherein they have stated that after the issuance of the Demand Notice, the Corporate Debtor has not issued any notice of dispute nor paid the due amount to the Operational Creditor. 20. From the list of invoices filed, it is evident that the claim as raised by the Operational Creditor is within the prescribed period of limitation of 3 years. The registered office of the Corporate Debtoris situated within the State of Tamilnadu, amenable to its territorial jurisdiction and this Authority has no hesitation in admitting this Petition and initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) as against the Corporate Debtor 21. Thus,....