<?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 (1) TMI 1277 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290922</link>
    <description>A Section 9 IBC petition was not taken to CIRP because the operational creditor&#039;s services were not disputed, but the invoices, limitation and pre-existing dispute objections, and the need for reconciliation meant the claim required further consideration. The Tribunal treated the proceedings as summary in nature and declined to decide disputed factual issues at that stage. Noting that the corporate debtor was a financially stable going concern and that immediate insolvency action could have serious civil consequences, it directed the creditor to file the claim with supporting evidence, required the debtor to consider it and issue a speaking order, and left liberty to file a fresh petition if aggrieved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Oct 2020 09:31:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=625821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 1277 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290922</link>
      <description>A Section 9 IBC petition was not taken to CIRP because the operational creditor&#039;s services were not disputed, but the invoices, limitation and pre-existing dispute objections, and the need for reconciliation meant the claim required further consideration. The Tribunal treated the proceedings as summary in nature and declined to decide disputed factual issues at that stage. Noting that the corporate debtor was a financially stable going concern and that immediate insolvency action could have serious civil consequences, it directed the creditor to file the claim with supporting evidence, required the debtor to consider it and issue a speaking order, and left liberty to file a fresh petition if aggrieved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=290922</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>