<?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 792 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397849</link>
    <description>Service of notice in insolvency proceedings was upheld where the disclosed email address on the corporate debtor&#039;s letterhead was used, notice was also sent to an additional email address and pasted at the relevant premises, and the resolution professional served the suspended directors and obtained responses from the statutory auditor. The public announcement was treated as notice to all concerned, so the plea of breach of natural justice failed as an afterthought. The appeal was also held time-barred because it was filed beyond the permissible period and the appellant was found to have knowledge of the proceedings. The admission of the insolvency application was therefore left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 17:10:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=621047" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (8) TMI 792 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397849</link>
      <description>Service of notice in insolvency proceedings was upheld where the disclosed email address on the corporate debtor&#039;s letterhead was used, notice was also sent to an additional email address and pasted at the relevant premises, and the resolution professional served the suspended directors and obtained responses from the statutory auditor. The public announcement was treated as notice to all concerned, so the plea of breach of natural justice failed as an afterthought. The appeal was also held time-barred because it was filed beyond the permissible period and the appellant was found to have knowledge of the proceedings. The admission of the insolvency application was therefore left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>