<?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 (8) TMI 423 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397480</link>
    <description>The appeal in Appeal No. 1275 of 2019 was allowed, directing the Resolution Professional to comply with the approved Resolution Plan without requiring further proof of succession from the legal heirs of Late Mukanchand Bothra. The Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order was modified accordingly. On the other hand, Appeal No. 844 of 2019 was rejected as the approved Resolution Plan was not under challenge, and the Resolution Professional was not considered an aggrieved party.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2020 08:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620079" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 423 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397480</link>
      <description>The appeal in Appeal No. 1275 of 2019 was allowed, directing the Resolution Professional to comply with the approved Resolution Plan without requiring further proof of succession from the legal heirs of Late Mukanchand Bothra. The Adjudicating Authority&#039;s order was modified accordingly. On the other hand, Appeal No. 844 of 2019 was rejected as the approved Resolution Plan was not under challenge, and the Resolution Professional was not considered an aggrieved party.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397480</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>