9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 960X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 (AA Rules) by Mittal Polymers, the Operational Creditor (OC), through Mr. Ashok Kumar Agrawal, Authorised Signatory of the OC, for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in respect of Suvarna Additives Limited, the Corporate Debtor (CD). 1.2 The total amount of default alleged is Rs.2,33,10,961/- (Two Crore Thirty-Three Lakh Ten Thousand Nine Hundred Sixty-One Rupees), which comprises of principal amount of Rs. 1,12,46,443/- and Rs. 1,20,64,518/- as compound interest as on 01.11.2019, calculated as per the provisions of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act). It is based on several unpaid invoices issued by the OC during the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate its contention, the OC relied on the Affidavit dated 17.01.2020 as well as its computation chart containing details of invoices raised, payment received from the CD and the interest calculated thereon as per the MSMED Act. 2.3 On account of failure of payment of aforesaid dues, the OC issued demand notice dated 15.11.2019 under Section 8 of the IBC to the CD for recovery of Rs. 2,33,60,961/- including compound interest as per the MSMED Act. Despite the receipt of demand notice on 02.12.2019 by the CD, it not only failed to give any reply but also did not make any payment towards settling the outstanding dues. 2.4 The OC has placed on record a statement of its bank account for the period from 01.11.2019 to 24.12.2019, showing that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intance with the online filing system of this Tribunal but these applications are now reflected on DMS portal. The CD has not filed any application to recall our order dated 15.12.2023, reserving the matter for orders. In the circumstances, we are not inclined to take cognizance of the reply filed by the CD. However, without prejudice to the above, we propose to deal with the present Application on merits based on the submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the OC and the CD. 4. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 4.1 We have perused all the documents and pleadings and heard both the Ld. Counsel for the OC and the CD. 4.2 As far as the issue of limitation is concerned, we find that the invoices claimed by the OC dated back 2015 to 2019 while the pres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held against the OC. 4.4 Since the OC did not produce any invoice on record, it is difficult to ascertain the veracity of its claims and upon perusal of its computation of claims, we find that all the invoices were raised during the period from 10.05.2015 to 31.12.2017. There is no evidence to suggest whether the alleged debt has been acknowledged by the CD. The bank account statement produced by the OC indicates receipt of Rs. 50,000/- from the CD 15.11.2019. However, in the absence of any purchase order or invoice, we cannot presume that the amount was in relation to any debt or liability as alleged by the OC. In the circumstances, we hold that the law of limitation has come into play since the present Application is filed beyond the li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
