<?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 518 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , HYDERABAD BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401719</link>
    <description>The NCLT dismissed the application seeking to declare the attachment of the corporate debtor&#039;s property null and void. The Tribunal held that the attachment, conducted by the ED under PMLA before the initiation of CIRP, was valid and confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority under PMLA. NCLT emphasized that challenges to such attachments should be pursued through appropriate forums under PMLA, as it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate these matters. The Tribunal concluded that Section 14 of IBC does not apply, and Section 32(A) was inapplicable as no resolution plan was approved. The application was deemed non-maintainable and dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 10:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=630259" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (12) TMI 518 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , HYDERABAD BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401719</link>
      <description>The NCLT dismissed the application seeking to declare the attachment of the corporate debtor&#039;s property null and void. The Tribunal held that the attachment, conducted by the ED under PMLA before the initiation of CIRP, was valid and confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority under PMLA. NCLT emphasized that challenges to such attachments should be pursued through appropriate forums under PMLA, as it lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate these matters. The Tribunal concluded that Section 14 of IBC does not apply, and Section 32(A) was inapplicable as no resolution plan was approved. The application was deemed non-maintainable and dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401719</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>