9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant : Manju Bhuteria, Shaubhik Chowdhury, Meenakshi Manot and Ayushmita Sinha, Advocates For the Respondents : Shaunak Mitra and Vishal Sinha, Advocates ORDER Rajasekhar V.K., Member (J) Prologue 1. The Court convened via video conference. 2. This is a Restoration Application filed by Mr. Subhash Chandra Tiwary, Deputy General Manager of Rawmet Resources Private Limited ('Operational Creditor'), authorized vide Board Resolution dated 15 January, 2021, inter alia, praying for the following reliefs; a. For revival of the petition of the Operational Creditor being C.P. (IB) No. 09/KB/2018 and to list the matter for urgent hearing. 3. The Operational Creditor had initiated a proceeding under Section 9 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the side of the Operational Creditor. Ld. Counsel appearing for the Corporate Debtor submits that the matter was settled out of Tribunal. It is recorded. For want of prosecution by the Operational creditor the petition is dismissed.' Annexure - C. 6.3. The Corporate Debtor failed to make the payment of the sixth instalment of a sum of Rs. 35,53,240/- (Rupees Thirty Five Lakh Fifty Three Thousand Two Hundred Forty only). Refer to point No. 10 of the Petition Payment for the fifth instalment was made on 17 July, 2018. Refer to point No. 8 of the Petition. 6.4. On failure of payment of the sixth instalment the Operational Creditor issued a letter dated 04 July, 2019 to the Corporate Debtor but no response was received fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ention that the sum of Rs. 31,23,488/- was in respect of the proceedings before the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Durgapur-III Division, Durgapur, arising out of a show cause-cum-demand notice dated 22 August 2017 for a sum of Rs. 34,80,412/- (of which Rs. 31,23,488/- relates to the Operational Creditor for the failure to provide STTG certificates). (d) The repayment was subject to the outcome of these proceedings, and the parties expressly agreed that the Corporate Debtor would recover the amount of Rs. 31,23,488/- along with interest and penalty from the Applicant, only upon the crystallization of the amount payable to the Central Excise Authority. (e) On 13 July 2018, the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Durgapur-III Division, Dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CGST, Durgapur-III Division-Durgapur. Hence, it is not open for the Applicant to claim the sixth instalment prior to the conclusion of proceedings pending before the Assistant Commissioner, CGST, Durgapur-III Division, Durgapur. 8. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Operational Creditor and the Corporate Debtor and perused the record. 9. Since the parties had entered into terms of settlement, any breach of the said terms of settlement would give rise to a different cause of action, and not the restoration of the underlying C.P. (IB) No. 9/KB/2019 to file. The intention of the Code is not to enforce settlement, but to resolve insolvency of the Corporate Debtor. Hence, the REST. A (IBC)/1/KB/2021 is dismissed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
