<?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>2023 (12) TMI 1015 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447331</link>
    <description>The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s decision that renewal of customs bank guarantees during CIRP was not essential for the corporate debtor&#039;s going concern status. The tribunal found that since the company was not importing goods during CIRP, no customs duty exemption could be claimed under MPP status. Renewal would impose Rs. 70 crores in commission and renewal charges without providing benefits. The Resolution Professional was empowered under Section 25(1) to reject the Committee of Creditors&#039; proposal for guarantee renewal as it would not lead to any advantage. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Dec 2023 12:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=736443" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (12) TMI 1015 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447331</link>
      <description>The NCLAT upheld the Adjudicating Authority&#039;s decision that renewal of customs bank guarantees during CIRP was not essential for the corporate debtor&#039;s going concern status. The tribunal found that since the company was not importing goods during CIRP, no customs duty exemption could be claimed under MPP status. Renewal would impose Rs. 70 crores in commission and renewal charges without providing benefits. The Resolution Professional was empowered under Section 25(1) to reject the Committee of Creditors&#039; proposal for guarantee renewal as it would not lead to any advantage. The appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447331</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>