<?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>2022 (1) TMI 460 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416995</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the sale of a Corporate Debtor as a &#039;Going Concern&#039; in Liquidation Proceedings includes both assets and liabilities. It emphasized that selling as a &#039;Going Concern&#039; entails transferring assets and liabilities together. Regarding the Appellant&#039;s attempt to withdraw from the bid after paying the EMD, the Tribunal ruled that the bid terms, which included liabilities, were binding. The Appellant&#039;s conditions communicated before the auction were rejected, and they were obligated to adhere to the bid terms. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the original order without finding any legal flaws.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2022 13:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666980" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 460 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416995</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the sale of a Corporate Debtor as a &#039;Going Concern&#039; in Liquidation Proceedings includes both assets and liabilities. It emphasized that selling as a &#039;Going Concern&#039; entails transferring assets and liabilities together. Regarding the Appellant&#039;s attempt to withdraw from the bid after paying the EMD, the Tribunal ruled that the bid terms, which included liabilities, were binding. The Appellant&#039;s conditions communicated before the auction were rejected, and they were obligated to adhere to the bid terms. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the original order without finding any legal flaws.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416995</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>