<?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 (4) TMI 430 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AMARAVATI BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420764</link>
    <description>An insolvency petition under the IBC was found unsustainable because the Memorandums of Understanding did not clearly bind the Corporate Debtor, as proper authorisation and party status were not established. The Tribunal also applied Article 137 of the Limitation Act to Section 7 proceedings and held that the alleged acknowledgment, including a cheque issued in 2020, did not revive a debt that had already become stale. On substance, the MoUs showed outstanding contractual steps that had to be completed before any enforceable right to recover arose, so no legally recoverable debt or default under Section 3(12) was established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Apr 2022 14:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=675565" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 430 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AMARAVATI BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420764</link>
      <description>An insolvency petition under the IBC was found unsustainable because the Memorandums of Understanding did not clearly bind the Corporate Debtor, as proper authorisation and party status were not established. The Tribunal also applied Article 137 of the Limitation Act to Section 7 proceedings and held that the alleged acknowledgment, including a cheque issued in 2020, did not revive a debt that had already become stale. On substance, the MoUs showed outstanding contractual steps that had to be completed before any enforceable right to recover arose, so no legally recoverable debt or default under Section 3(12) was established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=420764</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>