<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1999 (8) TMI 914 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108083</link>
    <description>Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 is to be strictly construed and applies only to rights, liabilities, and proceedings arising from matters existing before the relevant order or sanctioned scheme. A scheme framed under sections 17 and 18 is based on the company&#039;s existing assets and liabilities, and creditors bound under section 18(8) are those covered at that stage. Claims arising after sanction, being independent of the scheme, do not fall within the moratorium merely because recovery may be sought against company assets. The bar cannot be extended by interpretation to future liabilities, and proceedings based on post-scheme claims are therefore not excluded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Mar 2012 16:31:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145100" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1999 (8) TMI 914 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108083</link>
      <description>Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 is to be strictly construed and applies only to rights, liabilities, and proceedings arising from matters existing before the relevant order or sanctioned scheme. A scheme framed under sections 17 and 18 is based on the company&#039;s existing assets and liabilities, and creditors bound under section 18(8) are those covered at that stage. Claims arising after sanction, being independent of the scheme, do not fall within the moratorium merely because recovery may be sought against company assets. The bar cannot be extended by interpretation to future liabilities, and proceedings based on post-scheme claims are therefore not excluded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Aug 1999 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>