TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 484
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Bankruptcy Code 2016 (in short, 'I&B Code, 2016') r/w Rule 6 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 against M/s. Arjun Pulp and Paper (India) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Corporate Debtor'). The prayer made is to admit the Application, to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIR Process) against the Corporate Debtor, declare moratorium and appoint Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). 2. Heard the Learned Counsels for the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor and perused the pleadings including the documents placed on file. 3. The Operational Creditor has claimed an amount of Rs. 63,54,412/- (Rupees Sixty Three Lakhs Fifty Four Thous....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the calculation of the alleged claim amount. 6. Under paragraph 5 of the said reply, the detail of the payments made by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor has been given, which is being supported with Credit Note dated 13.02.2018, for an amount of Rs. 17,12,649/- issued by the Operational Creditor in favour of the Corporate Debtor, which is placed at page 105 of the typed set filed with the Application. 7. The Learned Counsel for the Operational Creditor has made a reference to the document placed at Page 79 of the typed set filed with the Application, which as per the Operational Creditor is the confirmation given by the Corporate Debtor. It is noted that when the communication dated 25.10.2017, which is placed at p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plication, which provides that the final agreed statement from the Operational Creditor after the July 2015 meeting, the balance is only Rs. 55.51 Lakhs and it is also noted that an amount of Rs. 10 Lakhs has been paid to the Operational Creditor by the Corporate Debtor in respect of both the accounts i.e. Operational Creditor viz. Solenis Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd., and Connell Bros Company (I) Pvt. Ltd. 10. It is specifically noted that the Invoice under which the claim is made, is only relating to the Operational Creditor namely Solenis Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd., and not been acquired by the Operational Creditor, with respect to which the Corporate Debtor has admitted an amount of Rs. 27,79,620/- as per the balance confirmation dated 0....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the appropriation of payment of Rs. 27,30,000/- requires to be decided on legal merits. Similarly, with regard to the Debit Note raised by the Corporate Debtor against the Operational Creditor, it was observed that due to lack of concrete documentary evidence, the same also requires to be decided based on legal merits. 14. In a nutshell, the case of the Operational Creditor is that it had acquired the part of the business of one Connell Bross vide Asset Purchase Agreement dated 09.02.2015 and pursuant to which Connell Bross has transferred all its receivables which includes the receivables of Corporate Debtor. A subsequent Assignment Agreement was executed on 31.03.2015 to assign receivables as on date to the Operational Creditor which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 05.09.2018 16. It is worthwhile to refer to the provisions of the I&B Code, 2016 more particularly to Section 9(5)(ii)(d) of the I&B Code, 2016 which provides that if notice of dispute has been received by the Operational Creditor or there is a record of dispute in Information Utility, this Authority is required to reject the Application and thereby communicating the dismissal to both the Operational Creditor as well the Corporate Debtor. 17. Added to this, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kirusa Software (P) Limited held that the 'existence of dispute' and/or the suit or arbitration proceeding must be pre-existing i.e. it must exist before the receipt of the Demand Notice or Invoice as....