https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442463 The Tribunal upheld the validity of the 1st Respondent's invocation of Bank Guarantees, dismissing the Appellant's challenge. It was determined that the invocation was justified due to the Corporate Debtor's adverse progress of work, as evidenced during Joint Coordination Meetings. The Tribunal clarified that the moratorium under Section 14 of the I&B Code, 2016 does not apply to Performance Bank Guarantees, which were deemed valid and not considered security interests. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the legality of the Bank Guarantees' invocation and closing the connected pending application. en-us Fri, 01 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Sep 2023 07:50:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442463 The Tribunal upheld the validity of the 1st Respondent's invocation of Bank Guarantees, dismissing the Appellant's challenge. It was determined that the invocation was justified due to the Corporate Debtor's adverse progress of work, as evidenced during Joint Coordination Meetings. The Tribunal clarified that the moratorium under Section 14 of the I&B Code, 2016 does not apply to Performance Bank Guarantees, which were deemed valid and not considered security interests. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the legality of the Bank Guarantees' invocation and closing the connected pending application. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 01 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442463