<?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 (8) TMI 1399 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311511</link>
    <description>A Section 7 insolvency petition must be founded on a proven default existing before filing; the filing date cannot itself be treated as the date of default. Where repayment under the memorandum of understanding was contingent on recall, the creditor had to prove issuance and service of a recall notice, and the absence of such proof meant no legally sustainable default was shown. The limitation objection also succeeded because the application was filed beyond three years from the last admitted payment, and the later default date was not established. The circumstances around the memorandum and filings also warranted scrutiny for possible fraudulent or malicious initiation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Dec 2023 08:30:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=738522" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 1399 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311511</link>
      <description>A Section 7 insolvency petition must be founded on a proven default existing before filing; the filing date cannot itself be treated as the date of default. Where repayment under the memorandum of understanding was contingent on recall, the creditor had to prove issuance and service of a recall notice, and the absence of such proof meant no legally sustainable default was shown. The limitation objection also succeeded because the application was filed beyond three years from the last admitted payment, and the later default date was not established. The circumstances around the memorandum and filings also warranted scrutiny for possible fraudulent or malicious initiation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311511</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>