<?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>2018 (11) TMI 1537 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371194</link>
    <description>The Tribunal admitted the petition under Section 9 of the IBC, declaring a moratorium and appointing an IRP. The Corporate Debtor&#039;s contentions regarding the validity of the LOI, the requirement of a Performance Bank Guarantee, and the dispute over the amount claimed were not upheld. The Tribunal found that the Operational Creditor was entitled to the claimed amount and interest for delayed payment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 07:23:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=544742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 1537 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371194</link>
      <description>The Tribunal admitted the petition under Section 9 of the IBC, declaring a moratorium and appointing an IRP. The Corporate Debtor&#039;s contentions regarding the validity of the LOI, the requirement of a Performance Bank Guarantee, and the dispute over the amount claimed were not upheld. The Tribunal found that the Operational Creditor was entitled to the claimed amount and interest for delayed payment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>