TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 659
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lvency Resolution Process ("CIRP") against the respondent/corporate debtor on account of a default in payment of the operational debt amounting to Rs. 3,61,24,534.33/-was dismissed. 2. It is alleged the operational debt arises out of the goods duly supplied by the appellant to the respondent, for which invoices were raised and part payments were also made. It is further submitted initially the company petition was dismissed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 31.07.2025 solely on the ground, the respondent has been admitted into CIRP in another company petition viz. C.P. (IB) No.369/AHM/2024 and the adjudicating authority while dismissing the proceedings granted liberty to the appellant to seek revival of the Company Petition, in case the admission order is set aside. Subsequently, this Tribunal had set aside the admission order vide order dated 14.11.2025 and thereafter the Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 31.07.2025 had granted liberty to the appellant to revive the petition. Thus, C.P. (IB) No.103/AHM/2025 was restored. 3. However, vide the impugned order, this company petition was again dismissed on the ground there exists a Pre-Existing Dispute ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....U TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED having its office at 1-E/2, Jhandewalan Extension, Delhi, Delhi-110055 ("Addressee") We issue this legal notice on behalf of OFB Tech Pvt. Ltd., having its registered office at Shop No. G-22C, (UGF) D-1 (K-84), Green Park Main, New Delhi-110016 ("Our Client") concerning the serious and fraudulent activities involving certain transactions ostensibly between Our Client and the Addressee. This notice serves to formally outline our client's position regarding the fraudulent purchase orders ("POs") and the consequent purported delivery of materials by the Addressee to Our Client. 1. Pursuant to an ongoing internal investigation and verification of facts, it has come to Our Client's knowledge that the Addressee, through its various officers, in collusion with certain employees of Our Client, have engaged in siphoning off of funds from Our Clients through the modus of generation of fake POs which have resulted in imposition of false and unfounded liabilities on Our Client. Without prejudice to the discoveries which may be made during the course of the ongoing investigation (as well as that which may be initiated pursuant to a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....btor that even prior to issuance of the demand notice, the entire transaction had been disputed on the ground that no valid purchase orders were issued, no goods were received, and that the alleged supplies were a result of fraudulent acts. The Corporate Debtor has also relied upon correspondence exchanged between the parties, including notices dated 13.09.2024 and 17.10.2024, to demonstrate that disputes regarding the very foundation of the claim were in existence prior to invocation of the Code. 31.4. Per contra, the Operational Creditor has contended that the alleged disputes are an afterthought and have been raised only to evade liability. It is submitted that the Corporate Debtor had acknowledged the transactions and made payments during the course of business, and that no dispute was raised contemporaneously with the supply of goods. It is further contended that the reliance placed by the Corporate Debtor on criminal complaints and other proceedings does not constitute a valid pre-existing dispute in terms of the Code, particularly when such proceedings were either closed or withdrawn. 31.7. Upon consideration of the material placed on record, it is observed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt, which is soon to commence. 10. Thus, it is the consistent case of the respondent the entire transaction between the appellant and respondent, carried out in the short interval of time between June 2024 to July 2024, was a result of a fraud played upon the respondent by its ex-employees in collusion with the appellant; the entire transaction was made to appear genuine by these ex-employees of the respondent by fabrication of documents and records; any payments released by the respondent to the appellant were under this impression of genuineness of the transaction, which was only exposed to be false and fabricated on or about 12.08.2024; the entire facts, as they became known over a period of time, are set out in detail in the Suit filed by the respondent before the Delhi High Court and are indicative of the several disputed questions of fact between the parties, which will be adjudicated upon at the trial; the actual transaction came to light over a period of time, when internal investigation was carried out by the respondent. 11. It was further submitted the fact of non-genuineness of the transaction was evident from the documents filed by the appellant itself. It is se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under these fraudulent POs were delivered to a third-party trader(s) with whom Our Client has no relationship, business or otherwise. Subsequently, the funds generated from these fraudulent transactions were misappropriated by at least one of the implicated employees named herein for personal gains. It may be stated that Our Client has already initiated suitable legal action against these employees and those found to be in collusion with these employees. 8. Therefore, in the light of the above facts, the Addressee is hereby notified that Our client is not liable to any amounts claimed by the Addressee against the POs mentioned in paragraph 1 and any such others as may have been generated by the Addressee in collusion with the aforesaid erstwhile employees or buyers and which may come to light as a result of the ongoing investigation." 13. Thus it cannot be said that Respondent ever admitted the debt of more than Rs. 1 crore at any stage of the proceedings. Admittedly they had filed Civil Suit qua the loss and against issuance of purchase orders and allege never any supplies were made to them against purchase orders. 14. Thus all of these disputed question of facts r....