TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 144
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....-293, Kehar Singh Estate, West End Marg, Saidulajaib, Opp. Saket-D Block, New Delhi 110030, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of this Tribunal. 3. It is stated by the Applicant/Operational Creditor that in the month of February, 2018 the Corporate Debtor approached them for hiring certain industrial machines for facilitating their construction activities. After assurance of the corporate debtor, the applicant leased out and transported the same to the desired location for a consideration of monthly rent, dependent upon the number of hours the machines were operated (excluding other charges and receivables). 4. It is added that the Corporate Debtor issued purchase order No. ALT/P.O./2017-18/35 dated 09.02.2018 to the applicant for supply of two scissor lift machines-10 meters platform height with operator for Samsung firefighting project at Bhiwadi, Jaipur. The said purchase order was revised on 23.05.2018 for a period of three months. 5. The Applicant further states that after commencement of operations, the invoices were raised at the end of each month when the machine was used. The Corporate Debtor was required to make payment within 15 days from the date of the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petitioner was required to provide log books detailing hours put in by their employees and the invoices were raised accordingly against the hours detailed in Log Books. As per the contract, the Corporate Debtor was supposed to remit the amount due only after proper verification of the invoices and records. c) That in due course, it was noticed that there were blatant over writings and suspicious entries without corroboration to log books submitted by the applicant. It was further noticed that the Applicant through fraudulent means had increased their work hours there by inflating the amounts in the invoices. d) It is the averment of the Corporate Debtor that a dispute pertaining to the discrepancies in the log book such as overwriting, improper monthly reports and increase in work hours for 21 hours or more which is in violation of industry standards had already been raised prior to the issue of demand notice. Further, the applicant has also failed to file the monthly reports and the existing disputes render the invoices of the petitioner completely redundant. Also, in the reply dated 11.12.2018 to the notice dated 30.11.2018, the corporate debtor again stated that there is a d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions of the Corporate Debtor are pre-existing dispute regarding the invoices raised by the applicant, the discrepancies between the log books and the monthly reports of the applicant and breach of contract by the applicant. 12. In the present case, the main documentary evidences placed on record by the Applicant are the ledger statement, the invoices raised and the cheque for part-payment of Rs. 4,00,00/- only which was received from the corporate debtor but got dishonored and returned vide Return Memo dated 17.10.2018 with the remark "Account Closed". 13. It is the case of Corporate Debtor that it had much before the date of issuance of the demand notice under Section 8 of the IBC had raised dispute regarding the discrepancies in the Log books, monthly report and the issuance of incorrect invoices. However, we notice that the corporate debtor has failed to place on record or produce any communication, exchanged with the applicant, evidencing any 'PreExisting Dispute' prior to the issue of Demand Notice. It is also pertinent to mention that in its Reply to the Application, the applicant apart from raising a bald denial of liability, has not filed any substantive material ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ued a cheque of Rs. 4,00,000/- towards part payment of dues, which got dishonored and was returned vide return memo dated 17.10.2018. Thereafter, vide email dated 12.11.2018 (Pg 84-85 of the application) the Corporate Debtor had sent the statement of account and the Ledger of the Applicant Company reflecting the Revised Invoice amount as Rs. 14,93,738/-. 15. As per the averments made in the application in Form-5 : Part IV, a sum of Rs. 5,64,618/-, has only been received by the Applicant and a sum of Rs. 9,29,120/- is still due and payable. Accordingly, an unpaid operational debt of more than 1 Lakh is clearly due and payable to the Applicant. Further, the cheque issued by the Corporate Debtor towards part-payment of its liability is a clear admission of the outstanding liability. Also, during the course of hearing, the corporate Debtor has time and again stated that they are in the process of settling the matter amicably with the applicant, which is again, an admission of unpaid operational debt due and payable by them to the Applicant. In view of the above, we are further strengthened by the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the "Innoventive Industries Ltd. Vs. IC....