<?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 (12) TMI 34 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , KOCHI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401235</link>
    <description>The NCLT admitted the application under Section 9 of the I&amp;B Code filed by the Operational Creditor against the Corporate Debtor for default in payment. The Tribunal imposed a moratorium under Section 14, prohibiting certain actions against the Corporate Debtor, and appointed Mr. Dileep K.P as the Interim Resolution Professional to oversee the corporate insolvency resolution process. Despite the Corporate Debtor&#039;s claims of a pre-existing dispute and issues with interest calculation, the Tribunal found no substantial evidence supporting these claims. The Tribunal did not address the threshold limit contention, focusing on the validity of the claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Nov 2024 13:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=629103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 34 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , KOCHI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401235</link>
      <description>The NCLT admitted the application under Section 9 of the I&amp;B Code filed by the Operational Creditor against the Corporate Debtor for default in payment. The Tribunal imposed a moratorium under Section 14, prohibiting certain actions against the Corporate Debtor, and appointed Mr. Dileep K.P as the Interim Resolution Professional to oversee the corporate insolvency resolution process. Despite the Corporate Debtor&#039;s claims of a pre-existing dispute and issues with interest calculation, the Tribunal found no substantial evidence supporting these claims. The Tribunal did not address the threshold limit contention, focusing on the validity of the claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>