<?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 (9) TMI 64 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385296</link>
    <description>Writ petitions filed in the name of a corporate debtor were not maintainable once insolvency proceedings had been admitted, moratorium declared, and an interim resolution professional appointed. Under section 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the board of directors stood suspended and the interim resolution professional acquired control of management and authority to act for the company, including for compliance with legal requirements. A company could not pursue writ relief through its own officer while that statutory control remained with the interim resolution professional. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty left to the interim resolution professional to take appropriate proceedings if advised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 08:05:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585793" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 64 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385296</link>
      <description>Writ petitions filed in the name of a corporate debtor were not maintainable once insolvency proceedings had been admitted, moratorium declared, and an interim resolution professional appointed. Under section 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the board of directors stood suspended and the interim resolution professional acquired control of management and authority to act for the company, including for compliance with legal requirements. A company could not pursue writ relief through its own officer while that statutory control remained with the interim resolution professional. The petitions were dismissed, with liberty left to the interim resolution professional to take appropriate proceedings if advised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385296</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>