<?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 (12) TMI 1155 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416389</link>
    <description>The National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, ruled in favor of the Applicant in a case involving a petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The dispute centered on the non-payment of GST amount following an assignment deed transferring a trademark, with the Respondent disputing the GST payment obligation and raising objections related to fraud and criminal activities. The Tribunal found in favor of the Applicant, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the Respondent&#039;s defenses and highlighting the importance of distinguishing genuine disputes from spurious defenses. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the Applicant&#039;s claim, appointed an Insolvency Resolution Professional, and initiated procedural steps under the Code.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 08:50:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665358" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (12) TMI 1155 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416389</link>
      <description>The National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench, ruled in favor of the Applicant in a case involving a petition filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The dispute centered on the non-payment of GST amount following an assignment deed transferring a trademark, with the Respondent disputing the GST payment obligation and raising objections related to fraud and criminal activities. The Tribunal found in favor of the Applicant, emphasizing the lack of evidence supporting the Respondent&#039;s defenses and highlighting the importance of distinguishing genuine disputes from spurious defenses. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the Applicant&#039;s claim, appointed an Insolvency Resolution Professional, and initiated procedural steps under the Code.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416389</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>