<?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 718 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417253</link>
    <description>Unsecured creditors were treated as having locus to appeal in the liquidation proceedings, and exclusion of the COVID-19 period made the delayed filing within limitation, so the appeal was maintainable. On liquidation conduct, the record showed constitution of the Stakeholders&#039; Consultation Committee and approvals for sale, but also communication gaps, unclear asset-grouping strategy, and delay between SCC decisions and auctions. Those concerns justified corrective scrutiny, yet not the exceptional step of replacing the liquidator or cancelling completed sales. The Tribunal instead directed expeditious completion of liquidation and restriction of liquidation costs to actual expenses.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2022 08:51:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=667589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 718 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417253</link>
      <description>Unsecured creditors were treated as having locus to appeal in the liquidation proceedings, and exclusion of the COVID-19 period made the delayed filing within limitation, so the appeal was maintainable. On liquidation conduct, the record showed constitution of the Stakeholders&#039; Consultation Committee and approvals for sale, but also communication gaps, unclear asset-grouping strategy, and delay between SCC decisions and auctions. Those concerns justified corrective scrutiny, yet not the exceptional step of replacing the liquidator or cancelling completed sales. The Tribunal instead directed expeditious completion of liquidation and restriction of liquidation costs to actual expenses.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417253</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>