<?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>2019 (1) TMI 452 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373287</link>
    <description>A financial debt and continuing default were established from the loan documents, guarantee papers, balance confirmations and account statements, showing disbursal against consideration for the time value of money and no repayment after default. Objections based on nondisclosure of one sanction letter, an alleged incorrect default date, limitation, and disputed interest computation did not displace the existing default or prevent admission; the later sanction letter and its cancellation could not erase an earlier default, and interest disputes were left to the insolvency process. Pending SARFAESI or other recovery proceedings also did not bar initiation of CIRP under section 7, so the application was admitted with moratorium and appointment of the interim resolution professional.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2019 08:07:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=552151" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 452 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373287</link>
      <description>A financial debt and continuing default were established from the loan documents, guarantee papers, balance confirmations and account statements, showing disbursal against consideration for the time value of money and no repayment after default. Objections based on nondisclosure of one sanction letter, an alleged incorrect default date, limitation, and disputed interest computation did not displace the existing default or prevent admission; the later sanction letter and its cancellation could not erase an earlier default, and interest disputes were left to the insolvency process. Pending SARFAESI or other recovery proceedings also did not bar initiation of CIRP under section 7, so the application was admitted with moratorium and appointment of the interim resolution professional.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373287</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>