TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Respondent claimed Rs. 45,34,589/- towards principal and Rs. 19,85,472/-towards the interest. The principal amount has been calculated on the basis of 13 invoices. The details of the said invoices are as under:- Sr. No. Date of Invoice Amount of invoice Due Date 15% Interest on Over Due 1. 28/06/2016 5,21,897.00 28/07/2016 2,33,138 2. 28/06/2016 4,74,525.00 28/07/2016 2,11,976 3. 29/06/2016 4,69,887.00 29/07/2016 2,09,711 4. 29/06/2016 7,99,386.00 29/07/2016 3,56,767 5. 30/06/2016 5,38,133.00 30/07/2016 2,39,948 6. 17/08/2016 3,12,163.00 16/09/2016 1,33,033 7. 17/08/2016 3,15,598.00 16/09/2016 1,34,497 8. 20/08/2016 1,33,019.00 19/09/2016 56,524 9. 20/08/2016 77,933.00 19/09/2016 33,116 10. 23/08/2016 2,35,235.00 22/09/2016 99,669 11. 23/08/2016 2,92,704.00 22/09/2016 1,24,018 12. 31/08/2016 2,04,099.00 30/09/2016 85,805 13. 31/08/2016 1,60,010.00 30/09/2016 67,270 3. The Respondent, before filing the application under Section 9, served demand notice to the CD on 23.07.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n to entertain the claim? Now we deal with both the issues together: (i) The Learned Counsel for the Respondent vehemently contended that claim is barred by limitation since the application filed after 3 years from the date of default. The Adjudicating Authority extracted the invoices raised by the Appellant in a tabular column. From the perusal of the invoices, the Appellant raised 13 invoices amounting to Rs. 45,34,589/- towards principal due. The Adjudicating Authority taken a stand that out of 13 invoices claimed by the Appellant 11 invoices are time barred i.e. the last invoice dated 23.08.2016 and the Application under Section 9 was filed on 26.08.2019, therefore, it is beyond 3 years as per Section 137 of the Limitation Act. However, the (2) invoices both dated 31.08.2016 are within the period of limitation, since the application filed on 26.08.2019. Having taken into consideration the 2 invoices which are within the period of limitation, the Adjudicating Authority failed to consider that the amount even for the 2 invoices satisfies the minimum threshold prescribed under Section 4 of the I&B Code, 2016 (pre-amended). As per Section 4 of the I&B Code, 2016 the minimu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ame, corporate insolvency resolution process can be initiated. The Corporate Debtor further submits that in order to avoid further consequences of initiation of CIRP, it is ready and willing to make the payment of amount of two invoices dated 31/8/2016, i.e. Rs. 3,64,100/- (Rupees Three Lakh Sixty Four Thousand and Hundred only) along with the interest accrued thereon to the Operational Creditor. The Corporate Debtor undertakes that if allowed by this Hon'ble Tribunal to do so, it will immediately initiate the payment of amount of Rs. 3,64,100/- (Rupees Three Lakh Sixty Four Thousand and Hundred only) along with the interest accrued thereon and furnish the details of the payment before this Hon'ble Tribunal. 6. In the light of the above mentioned facts, the Corporate Debtor most respectfully prays for the following reliefs: a. This application be kindly allowed. b. The Corporate Debtor be allowed to make the payment of Rs. 3,64,100/- due for the two invoices dated 31/8/2016 along with the interest accrued thereon to the Operational Creditor. c. In pursuance to the payment of the amount due for the two invoices dated 31/8/2016, the present....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s together: (i) The Learned Counsel for the Respondent vehemently contended that claim is barred by limitation since the application filed after 3 years from the date of default. The Adjudicating Authority extracted the invoices raised by the Appellant in a tabular column. From the perusal of the invoices, the Appellant raised 13 invoices amounting to Rs. 45,34,589/- towards principal due. The Adjudicating Authority taken a stand that out of 13 invoices claimed by the Appellant 11 invoices are time barred i.e. the last invoice dated 23.08.2016 and the Application under Section 9 was filed on 26.08.2019, therefore, it is beyond 3 years as per Section 137 of the Limitation Act. However, the (2) invoices both dated 31.08.2016 are within the period of limitation, since the application filed on 26.08.2019. Having taken into consideration the 2 invoices which are within the period of limitation, the Adjudicating Authority failed to consider that the amount even for the 2 invoices satisfies the minimum threshold prescribed under Section 4 of the I&B Code, 2016 (pre-amended). As per Section 4 of the I&B Code, 2016 the minimum threshold was Rs. 1,00,000/- and the amount for the 2 i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as stated by Respondent No. 2 that he has served intimation, made the publication, appointed a Legal Counsel with a lump sum fee of Rs. 75,000/-. He has submitted that if the matter is to be settled at Rs. 3,64,100 as argued by the Appellant which is the amount actually due in respect of two invoices then at least the CD should pay the expenses incurred by him which according to him comes to Rs. 2,11,940/-. It is submitted that the amount spent by the IRP is Rs. 93,940/- on the aforesaid heads and he has charged Rs. 1,00,000 as a fees with GST 18%. According to him the total amount comes to Rs. 2,11,940/-. 11. Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that since the dispute is only about two invoices and he is ready and willing to pay the said amount and had in fact deposited Rs. 3,64,000/- with @ 15% interest on 13.08.2024 till that date before this Court, therefore, the matter can be disposed of by issuing a direction that aforesaid amount may be paid to the Respondent alongwith interest which has accrued after the deposit of this amount. He has also submitted that the amount to be paid to the IRP may also be ordered by this court. 12. On the other hand, Counsel for the Resp....