<?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 523 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428965</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s decision, dismissing the application due to insufficient evidence of fraudulent trading under Section 66(1) of the IBC, 2016. It determined that the asset transfers within group companies were transparent and lacked fraudulent intent. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the connected stay application was closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2024 16:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=693307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 523 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428965</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s decision, dismissing the application due to insufficient evidence of fraudulent trading under Section 66(1) of the IBC, 2016. It determined that the asset transfers within group companies were transparent and lacked fraudulent intent. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the connected stay application was closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428965</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>