<?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 (7) TMI 1480 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310927</link>
    <description>A resolution professional&#039;s information memorandum was held not to involve proved misrepresentation or fraudulent suppression, because the disclosed data was based on available reports and the alleged production-capacity discrepancy and pending tax matters did not establish intentional deceit. The tribunal&#039;s power to recall its own order was recognised, since fraud can vitiate proceedings and recall is not barred merely because the matter arises under insolvency law; the doctrine of merger did not apply on these facts because the alleged fraud had not been adjudicated in the earlier appeals. Directions implementing the approved resolution plan, including payment of dues to employees and creditors, were therefore upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2023 05:53:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=733013" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (7) TMI 1480 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310927</link>
      <description>A resolution professional&#039;s information memorandum was held not to involve proved misrepresentation or fraudulent suppression, because the disclosed data was based on available reports and the alleged production-capacity discrepancy and pending tax matters did not establish intentional deceit. The tribunal&#039;s power to recall its own order was recognised, since fraud can vitiate proceedings and recall is not barred merely because the matter arises under insolvency law; the doctrine of merger did not apply on these facts because the alleged fraud had not been adjudicated in the earlier appeals. Directions implementing the approved resolution plan, including payment of dues to employees and creditors, were therefore upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>