TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 89
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Advocates. For the Respondents Mr. Amol Vyas, Advocate for R-1 Mr. Eshaan Sanghi & Mr. Prashant Sharma, Advocates for R-2 JUDGEMENT NARESH SALECHA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) 1. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant i.e., Mr. Irfan Khan, who is the suspended Director of M/s Western Energetics Pvt. Ltd. under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('Code') against the Impugned Order dated 19.09.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, ("Adjudicating Authority") in CP No. (IB)- l8/9/JPR/2021. Rakesh Kumar Goswami, who is the Proprietor of Lamsyn Enterprises is the Respondent No.1 herein. M/s Western Energetics Pvt. Ltd., the Corporate Debtor, through Mr. Satyendra Prasad Khorania t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... fact that lump-sum payments were made to the Respondent No. 1, as opposed to payments precisely matching the value of specific invoices. The Appellant referred to the Certificate issued by the banker, evidencing lump-sum payments since 18.08.2018. The Appellant contended that the Respondent No. I/Operational Creditor misled the Adjudicating Authority by asserting in the Section 9 application that material was supplied only since August 2019, whereas the ledger maintained in the books of the Operational Creditor clearly establishes the existence of a running account and continuous payments since 2018. 4. The Appellant emphasized that the Respondent No.1 did not state and the date of default in Part -IV which is a mandatory statutory requ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant to which a legal notice was issued by the Operational Creditor/Respondent No. 1 against the Corporate Debtor 7. The Appellant tried to impress upon us that, since the cheques were dishonoured on 29.01.2021, the default is deemed to have occurred during the period of suspension as provided under Section 10A of the Code (i.e., on or after 25.03.2020 up to 24.03.2021), as Section 10A provides a condition that in case the date of default is post 25.03.2020, then in that case an Operational Creditor cannot file an application under Section 9 of the Code. 8. At this stage, we note Section 10A, which reads as under: "Section 10A. Suspension of Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process.- Notwithstanding anyth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to satisfy itself only events that proves the occurrence of a debt and default. The Respondent No. 1 stated that in the present case, all the invoice is of 2019 and the insolvency application came to be filed by the Operational Creditor in the year 2021 and therefore the issue of limitation does not arise at all. The Respondent No. 1 stated that in its application, it had mentioned that the date of default is 30 days from the date of the invoice. 10. The Respondent No. 1 pleaded that in terms of section 3(12) of the code, the default is non-payment of debt, when whole or any part or instalment of the amount of debt become due and payable and is not paid by the debtor or corporate debtor, as the case may be. Thus, the amount mentioned in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ote that the amount was to be paid within a period of30 days from the date of receipt of the invoice, thus the debt fell due 30 days after the date of the invoice and therefore, the date of default is 19.10.2019, which can be considered the date of default. Hence, Section 10A has no applicability, in the present case and the Corporate Debtor clearly committed default prior to the Sector 10A period of the Code. 15. We further observe that the Respondent No. 1 filed Section 9 application on the basis of the default committed by the Corporate Debtor on 19.10.2019 and not on the basis of the dishonour of cheques issued by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor. Thus, we reject argument of the Appellant on this issue. 16. We also....