<?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>2018 (12) TMI 1942 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301145</link>
    <description>The National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai Bench admitted a Company Petition under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 due to default in debt repayment by the Corporate Applicant. The appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and the declaration of a moratorium with specific directions were key aspects of the judgment, ensuring compliance with the Code&#039;s provisions for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Apr 2023 12:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=672881" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1942 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301145</link>
      <description>The National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai Bench admitted a Company Petition under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 due to default in debt repayment by the Corporate Applicant. The appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and the declaration of a moratorium with specific directions were key aspects of the judgment, ensuring compliance with the Code&#039;s provisions for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301145</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>