TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 31
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 23rd September, 2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, whereby the petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by Appellant (Operational Creditor) has been dismissed. 2. The Appellant (Operational Creditor) a sole proprietorship firm is Manufacturer and Supplier of Iron & Steel Castings in India and has supplied the goods being the Valve Casting products to the Respondent (Corporate Debtor) who is a supplier of Gate Valves, Globe Valves in India. 3. The said goods were received and accepted by Corporate Debtor and there was no dispute at the time of delivery of the goods or thereafter relating to the Quantity and Quality of goods but subsequently....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Proposing payment plan as below" 3,66,095.00 - 25-Dec-2018 3,75,061.82 - 20-Jan-2019 3,07,756.98 - 20-Feb-2019 5,07,956.20 - 20-Mar-2019 We request you with humble to accept above payment plan. If required I propose to meet at your office and conclude if you have any suggestions or modifications. Best Regards, Vipul K. Parekh" Thus the Respondent (Corporate Debtor) admitted its liability to make payment to the Appellant in writing and also gave payment plan. The Respondent also paid Rs. 1,50,000/- to the Appellant on 05.11.2018 but failed to make payment even after its own admission and written promise. 6. The Respondent failed to adhere to its promise to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Respondent (Corporate Debtor) that the Appellant (Operational Creditor) tampered with the ledger account which was produced before the Ld. Adjudicating Authority and further committed fraud not disclosing the arrangement made between the parties. 11. It is further submitted that amount under the petition as per the condition is recovered, the Operational Creditor has to return the amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- to the Respondent (Corporate Debtor). 12. Learned counsel for the Appellant during the course of argument submitted that the Adjudicating Authority have failed to considered the facts that the Appellant herein send a Demand Notice under Section 8 of the I&B Code, 2016 on 22.08.2018 and the Respondent (Corporate Debtor) in its....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. Further, Flovel has accepted that said amount of 22 lacs paid/committed by EmRise is from the advance of next EmRise PO (DODSAL order) to Flovel. Flovel shall try and clear the outstanding to AK Alloys during the course of execution of order so that AK Alloys can pay back/release hold payment to EmRise. I Hope all points are clear to all parties involved. If any doubts or disagreement kindly revert back on timely manner." 14. So, taking the facts emerging the records and also the provision of law the Ld. Adjudicating Authority have given the finding that in reply issued by Mr. Vipul Parekh being the Director of the Corporate Debtor Company to Mr. Paresh Thakkar, Appellant (Operational Creditor) to show that there are....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;. 17. After hearing the parties and going through the order of the Ld. Adjudicating Authority, we are of the considered view that Annexure - 2 at Page no. 107 of the Appeal Paper Book statement does not show dues payment of Rs. 25,00,000/- by the Appellant (Operational Creditor). 18. Further, Annexure R-1 of the Written Submissions filed by the Respondent (Corporate Debtor) which is the e-mail ledger account of the Appellant (Operational Creditor) relevant at page no. 164 of the Appeal Paper Book dated 02-09-2016 shows receipt of Rs. 25,00,000/- first time during the course of argument before this Appellate Tribunal. This document has been marked as 'X'. 19. In the above circumstances, as letter sent by the Respondent (Corporate D....