<?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 (9) TMI 521 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398402</link>
    <description>The Tribunal recorded that the education asset sale had been undertaken within the approved resolution framework, supported by board approvals, creditor consent where required, and supervisory approval, and granted relief on that issue. It also took on record the proposal to initiate bankruptcy proceedings for the offshore entities, noting their lack of viable operations, inability to meet liabilities, and the approvals already obtained. The Tribunal further took on record the proposal to strike off the Singapore entity, considering that it had not commenced operations, no separate divestment process was viable, and the step had board and supervisory approval subject to regulatory compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2020 11:18:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=622263" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (9) TMI 521 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398402</link>
      <description>The Tribunal recorded that the education asset sale had been undertaken within the approved resolution framework, supported by board approvals, creditor consent where required, and supervisory approval, and granted relief on that issue. It also took on record the proposal to initiate bankruptcy proceedings for the offshore entities, noting their lack of viable operations, inability to meet liabilities, and the approvals already obtained. The Tribunal further took on record the proposal to strike off the Singapore entity, considering that it had not commenced operations, no separate divestment process was viable, and the step had board and supervisory approval subject to regulatory compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=398402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>