<?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 (8) TMI 798 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411220</link>
    <description>A petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found unsustainable because the claim was already time-barred and no fresh default was proved under the restructuring arrangement. The relevant default date was treated as 31.03.2009, or at the latest 28.06.2012, while the petition was filed in 2020, beyond the three-year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. The restructuring linked repayment to operational cash flows and did not require the corporate debtor to infuse funds for shortfalls, so it did not create a new enforceable default. On the material placed, the record also did not establish default in the manner required for admission under Section 7 IBC.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2021 08:07:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=653373" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (8) TMI 798 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , MUMBAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411220</link>
      <description>A petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was found unsustainable because the claim was already time-barred and no fresh default was proved under the restructuring arrangement. The relevant default date was treated as 31.03.2009, or at the latest 28.06.2012, while the petition was filed in 2020, beyond the three-year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. The restructuring linked repayment to operational cash flows and did not require the corporate debtor to infuse funds for shortfalls, so it did not create a new enforceable default. On the material placed, the record also did not establish default in the manner required for admission under Section 7 IBC.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411220</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>