<?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 (3) TMI 279 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419241</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that sole proprietorship firms are entitled to maintain applications as Operational Creditors against Corporate Debtors. However, in this case, the petitioner failed to prove that the goods were supplied to the respondent company, resulting in the dismissal of the petition without costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Mar 2022 08:42:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672138" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (3) TMI 279 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , NEW DELHI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419241</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that sole proprietorship firms are entitled to maintain applications as Operational Creditors against Corporate Debtors. However, in this case, the petitioner failed to prove that the goods were supplied to the respondent company, resulting in the dismissal of the petition without costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419241</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>