The Appellant, an operational creditor, initiated proceedings under Section 9 of the I&B Code against the Respondent. The application was filed in Form-5, with the date of default shown as 22.02.2022. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application via an order dated 21.02.2023, citing that the date of default mentioned in the application was later than the date of the demand notice and that the demand notice did not mention any date of default.
The Appellant initiated proceedings under Section 9 of the I&B Code against the Respondent.
The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application due to discrepancies in the date of default.
The Appellant argued that the demand notice was invoice-based (Form-4) and did not require a specific default date.
The Respondent contended that the date of default was later than the date of the demand notice.
The Appellate Tribunal quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter back to NCLT, Chennai.
Sign in to view the parties.
Date of defa…
Date on which the…
The Appellant, an operational creditor, initiated proceedings under Section 9 of the I&B Code against the Respondent. The application was filed in Form-5, with the date of default shown as 22.02.2022. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application via an order dated 21.02.2023, citing that the date of default mentioned in the application was later than the date of the demand notice and that the demand notice did not mention any date of default.
The Appellant initiated proceedings under Section 9 of the I&B Code against the Respondent.
The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application due to discrepancies in the date of default.
The Appellant argued that the demand notice was invoice-based (Form-4) and did not require a specific default date.
The Respondent contended that the date of default was later than the date of the demand notice.
The Appellate Tribunal quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter back to NCLT, Chennai.
Date of defa…
Date on which the…