<?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>2010 (7) TMI 821 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126947</link>
    <description>Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 imposes a statutory moratorium on recovery proceedings, enforcement of security, and enforcement of guarantees once a reference before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction is pending. In this context, loan-dues recovery initiated under the Madhya Pradesh recovery law could not continue without prior consent of the Board. The protection applies to recovery of outstanding loan liabilities of an industrial company and is not displaced by authorities dealing with unrelated tax claims. The operative effect is that such proceedings must remain stayed unless the Board grants consent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Oct 2014 11:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (7) TMI 821 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126947</link>
      <description>Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 imposes a statutory moratorium on recovery proceedings, enforcement of security, and enforcement of guarantees once a reference before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction is pending. In this context, loan-dues recovery initiated under the Madhya Pradesh recovery law could not continue without prior consent of the Board. The protection applies to recovery of outstanding loan liabilities of an industrial company and is not displaced by authorities dealing with unrelated tax claims. The operative effect is that such proceedings must remain stayed unless the Board grants consent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126947</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>