<?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>Sub-lease from 2016 upheld in CIRP; no fraud found, transaction not challenged as it predates proceedings by two years.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61297</link>
    <description>CIRP proceedings - Validity of Sub-lease - Admittedly, the transfer of portion of plot by sub-lease was effected on 27.09.2016 whereas CIRP initiated after more than two years i.e. on 26.11.2018. The RP has no ground to doubt the transaction which is more than two years prior to commencement of CIRP. The association has not raised any plea of fraud in transferring the plot by sub-lease to R-1 and the RP has failed to make out a case that the sub-lease was executed for depriving the rights of homebuyers - there are no substance in the argument of Ld. Counsel for the Appellant that the sub-lease is actuated by fraud, therefore, no limitation has applicable to such transaction. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2022 10:38:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2022 10:38:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Sub-lease from 2016 upheld in CIRP; no fraud found, transaction not challenged as it predates proceedings by two years.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61297</link>
      <description>CIRP proceedings - Validity of Sub-lease - Admittedly, the transfer of portion of plot by sub-lease was effected on 27.09.2016 whereas CIRP initiated after more than two years i.e. on 26.11.2018. The RP has no ground to doubt the transaction which is more than two years prior to commencement of CIRP. The association has not raised any plea of fraud in transferring the plot by sub-lease to R-1 and the RP has failed to make out a case that the sub-lease was executed for depriving the rights of homebuyers - there are no substance in the argument of Ld. Counsel for the Appellant that the sub-lease is actuated by fraud, therefore, no limitation has applicable to such transaction. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2022 10:38:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=61297</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>