<?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 (6) TMI 839 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408943</link>
    <description>Transfers made for significantly less consideration and outside the ordinary course of business were treated as undervalued transactions under the insolvency framework, and the relevant look-back period depended on whether the recipient was related or unrelated. On the facts, the transfers to respondents 1 to 3 were found avoidable, including where the trust was connected with a respondent&#039;s family and one recipient fell within the related-party framework. The Tribunal also held that the regulatory model timeline could not override the statute, and that the avoidance application was not defeated by limitation or by the composite form of pleading once the liquidator confined the claim to maintainable relief. Unrebutted ledger and balance-sheet entries were treated as prima facie proof, and restitution with interest was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2021 14:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=647782" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 839 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408943</link>
      <description>Transfers made for significantly less consideration and outside the ordinary course of business were treated as undervalued transactions under the insolvency framework, and the relevant look-back period depended on whether the recipient was related or unrelated. On the facts, the transfers to respondents 1 to 3 were found avoidable, including where the trust was connected with a respondent&#039;s family and one recipient fell within the related-party framework. The Tribunal also held that the regulatory model timeline could not override the statute, and that the avoidance application was not defeated by limitation or by the composite form of pleading once the liquidator confined the claim to maintainable relief. Unrebutted ledger and balance-sheet entries were treated as prima facie proof, and restitution with interest was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=408943</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>