TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 510
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd around April, 2016 they were informed from the market sources that the Corporate Debtor had ended its arrangement with "Medtronic" and on 18.05.2016 the Petitioner received an email from the Corporate Debtor asking them to return its stock of "Medtronic" products with a condition that the Petitioner would receive a full refund after a deduction of 10% towards restocking charges. The Petitioner accepted the above condition and delivered the unsold stock back to the Bhiwandi warehouse of the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor had also raised tax invoices on the Petitioner at the time of purchase of the abovementioned stock. 5. The Petitioner states that the unsold stock was delivered back to the Bhiwandi warehouse of the Corporate Debtor on 20.05.2016 as per the instructions of the Corporate Debtor. The said unsold stock amounting to Rs. 63,18,447/- were thoroughly checked and verified by the Officials of the Corporate Debtor and the delivery challan was duly signed and received by the Petitioner. 6. From the aforesaid amount, 10% restocking charges (i.e. Rs. 6,31,844/-) was deducted by the Petitioner while raising the dues. A further deduction of Rs. 8,93,881/- being un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Debtor, the Corporate Debtor, enters into a written contract with its sub-distributors. In the instant case, the Corporate Debtor, had informed the Petitioner to execute a written contract between the Petitioner and the Corporate Debtor with regard to PV and NV products. d. Though there was no written contract between the Petitioner and the Corporate Debtor with regard to the terms and conditions of the sale of PV and NV products, certain terms and conditions viz. with regard to the payment terms, of sale and return of products, the shelf life of the products and other allied terms and conditions pertaining to the sale of NV and PV products, were orally agreed upon between the parties. It was categorically agreed between the parties that in case of return of stocks by the Petitioner to the Corporate Debtor, the Petitioner would receive its payments only upon the acceptance of the stocks by the principal supplier and upon making his payment to the Corporate Debtor. e. The Corporate Debtor states that the Petitioner was appointed as the sub-distributor of the Corporate Debtor with regard to the PV and NV products on the aforesaid terms and conditions as orally agree....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmed him to return the NV non expiry stock on the similar terms and conditions as mentioned in email dated 08.10.2015, which was duly accepted by the said representative of the Corporate Debtor. Due to good business relationship between the Petitioner and the Corporate Debtor, the terms and conditions which were duly recorded in email dated 08.10.2015 were not repeated in the email dated 18.05.2016. j. The NV stocks which were duly returned at the warehouse of the Corporate Debtor was forwarded to the principal supplier viz. CHIPL, which is now taken over by M/s. India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd. However India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd., has failed to pay the price of the returned stocks, instead have raised certain disputes with the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor craves leave to refer to and rely upon letter dated 28.06.2016 addressed by India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd. to the Corporate Debtor in this behalf when produce at the hearing of this Petition. k. The stocks which were duly returned by the Petitioner to the Corporate Debtor were in turn forwarded by the Corporate Debtor to its principal supplier India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd. subsequently India Medtronic Pvt. Ltd. by its l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itten contract. These facts were not alleged either in Corporate Debtor's reply dated 24.10.2016 nor in their reply dated 19.04.2017. b. The Petitioner deny that there was any oral contract as alleged and that it was for the first time that the Corporate Debtor had come up with the cooked up story of the alleged oral contract only with the mala fide intention to create an apprehension in the minds of the Tribunal regarding a this issue. The Petitioner deny that there exists any written agreement between the Petitioner and the Corporate Debtor as alleged. The Petitioner also deny that it was agreed between the parties that in case of return of stocks by the Petitioner to the Corporate Debtor, the Corporate Debtor would receive its payments only upon the acceptance of the stocks by the principal supplier and upon making his payment to the Corporate Debtor. c. The Petitioner further submits that whatever disputes may be there between the Corporate Debtor and the principal supplier, the legitimate claim of the Petitioner can certainly not depend on the settlement of such dispute. d. The Petitioner also states that there was no oral contract/understanding ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cular Therapeutics (India) Pvt. Ltd. registered in Maharashtra with PAN. AABCV3562G has payable of Rs. 46,80,274.25/- to Kumar Brothers Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai as on 31st March, 2017. This amount is reflected in note 10 of Other Current Liabilities against Advance from customers - Rs. 88,93,433/- Total of Other Current Liabilities is Rs. 99,63,931/- PLACE: MUMBAI DATED: 8TH FEBRUARY, 2019 CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS" (PINKESH A. KAPADIA) Chartered Accountant Membership No. 40814" The above letter clearly shows that there is an acceptance of liability by the Corporate Debtor in his books of accounts regarding the amount payable to the Petitioner. 14. There is no written agreement between the Petitioner and the Corporate Debtor. Hence the Corporate Debtor's contention that it was categorically agreed between the parties that in case of return of stocks by the Petitioner to the Corporate Debtor, the Corporate Debtor would receive its payments only upon the acceptance of the stocks by the principal supplier, is not borne out by facts. The Bench is of the view that there may be disputes between the Corporate Debtor and the princi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;, for admission of a petition under Section 9 of the I&B Code, have been met in this case. 18. The application filed by the Operational Creditor is on proper Form 5, as prescribed under the Adjudicating Authority Rules and is complete. 19. The Applicant has proposed name of Mr. Mahesh Sureka, a registered Insolvency Resolution Professional having Registration Number [IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00413/2017-18/10736] as Interim Resolution Professional, to carry the functions of Interim Resolution Professional as mentioned under I&B Code. 20. The Application under sub-section (2) of Section 9 of I&B Code, 2016 filed by the Operational Creditor for initiation of CIRP in prescribed Form 5, as per the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 is complete. The existing operational debt is beyond the threshold limit against the Corporate Debtor and its default is also proved. Accordingly, the application filed under section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process against the Corporate Debtor deserves to be admitted. 21. This application is filed under Section 9 of I&B Code, 2016, filed by Kumar ....