<?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>2024 (1) TMI 89 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447690</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging rejection of CIRP initiation application. Respondent had sent email dated 10.05.2021 regarding breach of contract due to Air India and Jet Airways terminating Amadeus Software under GDS, significantly impacting respondent&#039;s airline business revenue. This email was sent prior to appellant&#039;s demand notice under Section 8 of IBC. NCLAT held the email constituted pre-existing dispute under Mobilox Innovations precedent, making CIRP application non-maintainable. Adjudicating Authority correctly found pre-existing dispute existed, and appellant failed to establish grounds to challenge this finding.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2024 11:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=738817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 89 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447690</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging rejection of CIRP initiation application. Respondent had sent email dated 10.05.2021 regarding breach of contract due to Air India and Jet Airways terminating Amadeus Software under GDS, significantly impacting respondent&#039;s airline business revenue. This email was sent prior to appellant&#039;s demand notice under Section 8 of IBC. NCLAT held the email constituted pre-existing dispute under Mobilox Innovations precedent, making CIRP application non-maintainable. Adjudicating Authority correctly found pre-existing dispute existed, and appellant failed to establish grounds to challenge this finding.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447690</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>