<?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>2021 (5) TMI 649 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , BENGALURU BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407770</link>
    <description>Refundable security deposits and contractual default amounts arising from land aggregation, settlement and share purchase arrangements did not amount to operational debt because they were funding or security payments, not consideration for goods or services. A Section 9 insolvency petition based on such claims was also not maintainable where the dispute was essentially contractual, involved contested party identification, and was required to be pursued under the agreed dispute-resolution mechanisms rather than as a recovery forum. The application was therefore treated as premature and outside the proper scope of the Code.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 May 2021 08:29:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=644795" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (5) TMI 649 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , BENGALURU BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407770</link>
      <description>Refundable security deposits and contractual default amounts arising from land aggregation, settlement and share purchase arrangements did not amount to operational debt because they were funding or security payments, not consideration for goods or services. A Section 9 insolvency petition based on such claims was also not maintainable where the dispute was essentially contractual, involved contested party identification, and was required to be pursued under the agreed dispute-resolution mechanisms rather than as a recovery forum. The application was therefore treated as premature and outside the proper scope of the Code.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=407770</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>