<?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>2020 (3) TMI 159 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393015</link>
    <description>Amounts raised from an allottee in a real estate project have the commercial effect of borrowing and may constitute financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, so the petitioner was treated as a financial creditor. However, the agreement required payment of the balance consideration within one year, and the petitioner failed to pay within that period. On those facts, the respondent&#039;s cancellation of the allotment followed the petitioner&#039;s non-performance, and no default by the respondent in repayment of financial debt was proved. Because the foundational requirement of financial default was absent, the insolvency petition was not maintainable and no relief could be granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2020 12:35:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=605869" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 159 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393015</link>
      <description>Amounts raised from an allottee in a real estate project have the commercial effect of borrowing and may constitute financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, so the petitioner was treated as a financial creditor. However, the agreement required payment of the balance consideration within one year, and the petitioner failed to pay within that period. On those facts, the respondent&#039;s cancellation of the allotment followed the petitioner&#039;s non-performance, and no default by the respondent in repayment of financial debt was proved. Because the foundational requirement of financial default was absent, the insolvency petition was not maintainable and no relief could be granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>