<?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 (10) TMI 96 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428538</link>
    <description>A liquidation e-auction of the corporate debtor as a going concern was found vitiated by material irregularity because, after extending the bidding timeline, the liquidator did not fix a fresh inspection date and time for prospective bidders. That omission was treated as denying a fair opportunity to inspect the asset, prejudicing effective participation in the auction and undermining value maximisation in liquidation. The irregularity was considered serious enough to affect the integrity of the sale process, so the setting aside of the e-auction was upheld and the appeals failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2022 17:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=692504" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 96 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428538</link>
      <description>A liquidation e-auction of the corporate debtor as a going concern was found vitiated by material irregularity because, after extending the bidding timeline, the liquidator did not fix a fresh inspection date and time for prospective bidders. That omission was treated as denying a fair opportunity to inspect the asset, prejudicing effective participation in the auction and undermining value maximisation in liquidation. The irregularity was considered serious enough to affect the integrity of the sale process, so the setting aside of the e-auction was upheld and the appeals failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>