<?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 (4) TMI 238 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751057</link>
    <description>Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the terms &quot;allottee&quot; and &quot;real estate project&quot; take their meaning from the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, and the Section 7 threshold must be satisfied project-wise by allottees of the same real estate project. Where the record showed multiple separately registered projects within a township, with distinct sanctioned plans and RERA registrations, allottees from different projects could not be aggregated to meet the second proviso to Section 7(1). On that basis, the Section 7 application was not maintainable as filed, and dismissal of the insolvency petition was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Apr 2024 06:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=749290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 238 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751057</link>
      <description>Under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, the terms &quot;allottee&quot; and &quot;real estate project&quot; take their meaning from the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, and the Section 7 threshold must be satisfied project-wise by allottees of the same real estate project. Where the record showed multiple separately registered projects within a township, with distinct sanctioned plans and RERA registrations, allottees from different projects could not be aggregated to meet the second proviso to Section 7(1). On that basis, the Section 7 application was not maintainable as filed, and dismissal of the insolvency petition was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>