Case Law Details
Steel India Vs M/s. Theme Developers Pvt Ltd (NCLT Mumbai)
We have carefully gone through the pleadings on record and pursued the submissions made by the counsels for both the sides. On careful perusal of the documents it is noticed that the Corporate Debtor has already paid the entire Principal amount to the Petitioner, which the Petitioner has accepted in his submissions. Therefore, it can be said that the Demand Notice dated 15.01.2019 was sent with the sole purpose of demanding payment of remaining amount of Rs. 22, 64,054/-, which in toto is interest payable, on the principal amount.
This Petition is based on the second Demand Notice issued by the Petitioner under Section 8 of the Code. The Petitioner purposefully screened the first Demand Notice dated 28 December 2018 and the reply of the Corporate Debtor to the said Demand Notice.
The invoices enclosed to the Petition were perused by the Bench and there is no provision of charging of interest by the Petitioner. Hence, the claim of interest by the Petitioner is devoid of merit.
The Contention of the Petitioner that TDS was deducted by the Corporate Debtor on account of payment of interest does not hold water in view of the fact that the said TDS is under section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which deals with TDS on payment by a Contractor for carrying out any work. In fact, if the TDS is under Section 194A, which deals with TDS on interest payment, the counsel for the Corporate Debtor maybe right to some extent. Hence this contention also fails.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
