<?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 424 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397481</link>
    <description>A Section 7 application must be complete at the admission stage, and a defective declaration concerning the proposed resolution professional was treated as a curable non-compliance rather than an incurable bar. The limitation objection failed because a written acknowledgment of debt and settlement conduct triggered a fresh limitation period under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with Article 137, so the filing was within time. However, the subsisting status quo order and the parties&#039; settlement conduct weighed against summary admission, and the admission order was set aside with remand for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2020 09:09:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 424 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397481</link>
      <description>A Section 7 application must be complete at the admission stage, and a defective declaration concerning the proposed resolution professional was treated as a curable non-compliance rather than an incurable bar. The limitation objection failed because a written acknowledgment of debt and settlement conduct triggered a fresh limitation period under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963, read with Article 137, so the filing was within time. However, the subsisting status quo order and the parties&#039; settlement conduct weighed against summary admission, and the admission order was set aside with remand for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397481</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>