9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 1420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aim as stated in the eighth schedule of I B Code, therefore we hold that this claim is within limitation. It is an admitted fact that this Corporate Debtor has not raised any dispute either by filing any suit or any proceeding in respect to of the quality of goods, therefore, this appears as a defense set up for the sake of frustrating this claim, but not basing on any dispute as required under I B Code. The Creditor in this case has not claimed any interest over the value of the goods supplied in the year 2011-12, he has only added the arrears of the interest that is payable by the Corporate Debtor for delay that has happened in making payment in respect to earlier invoices in 2010-11. Since it has been showing in the accounts ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Iron, Steel and raw-material supplied by the Operational Creditor in between 2011 and 2012 for an amount of ₹ 4,72,28,431 and also arrears of interest of Rs.10,70,493 on delayed payment made prior to 2011 i.e. from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2011. Brief facts of the Case: 1. The claim of the Operational Creditor accrued on account of supply of iron, steel and raw-material to the Corporate Debtor supplied during the years 2011-12 basing on details of the invoices as well as the dates upon which the Corporate Debtor became in default in making payments given in annexure-1 (page 10), the same is set out as below: 2. When it has been put to the Creditor Counsel as to how this Creditor entitled to make a claim in the year 2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding as on date this company was declared as sick unit. In addition to these two defenses, the Corporate Debtor has also raised a defense that this debtor company has never confirmed this claim made by this Creditor. 3. In support of the defenses raised, the Debtor Counsel, to justify his contention, relied upon a judgment in between Deputy Commercial Tax Officer and others v. Coromandel Pharmaceuticals and others AIR 1997 Supreme Court 2027 and Polymermann (Asia) P. Ltd. v. Union of India Others {2006} 133 Comp Cas 894 Bom, to say that suspension of legal proceedings in respect of dues against sick company applies only to such of those dues reckoned or included in the sanctioned scheme for rehabilitation. 4. But by reading these t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o such scheme has been sanctioned u/s. 29 of SICA, and therefore there was no occasion either to include or to exclude this claim when the scheme itself had not come into existence. 4. The paramount consideration given by the Supreme Court is that such amounts like sales tax, etc, which sick company is enabled to collect after the date of the sanctioned scheme legitimately belonging to the Revenue, cannot be withheld under the cover of section 22 of SICA. 5. Basing on the analogy above, the debtor cannot escape from the liability, because it is a fact that this due is covered by section 22(5), since it has not been said that section 22(5) is not in vogue, the argument for inclusion of computation of limitation during suspensio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has not claimed any interest over the value of the goods supplied in the year 2011-12, he has only added the arrears of the interest that is payable by the Corporate Debtor for delay that has happened in making payment in respect to earlier invoices in 2010-11. Since it has been showing in the accounts maintained by the applicant, we believe that this Creditor is entitled to claim the arrears of interest i.e. Rs. 10,70,400 over the dues of the year 2010-2011. To prove this claim, the Creditor having filed invoices for the goods supplied to the Corporate Debtor, as to default is concerned, since the Corporate Debtor himself has taken ground that the claim is barred by limitation, the Creditor having disclosed that no payment has been made b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... services to the corporate debtor, if continuing, shall not be terminated or suspended or interrupted during moratorium period. iii) That the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 14 shall not apply to such transactions as may be notified by the Central Government in consultation with any financial sector regulator. iv) That the order of moratorium shall have effect from 31.07.2017 till the completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process or until this Bench approves the resolution plan under sub-section (1) of section 31 or passes an order for liquidation of corporate debtor under section 33, as the case may be. v) That the public announcement of the corporate insolvency resolution process shall be made imm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
