<?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 (6) TMI 510 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753903</link>
    <description>The fifth proviso to section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 permits transfer of a pending winding up petition to the NCLT where the liquidation process has not reached an irreversible stage. On the facts, the Official Liquidator had not taken possession of the company&#039;s assets, the registered office had been handed over to the secured creditor, and no notice inviting claims from creditors or workmen had been issued. The Court treated these circumstances as showing that no irreversible step had been taken and accepted that the insolvency framework would protect creditor and workmen claims. The transfer was therefore warranted, subject to deposit of costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 03:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=756207" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 510 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753903</link>
      <description>The fifth proviso to section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 permits transfer of a pending winding up petition to the NCLT where the liquidation process has not reached an irreversible stage. On the facts, the Official Liquidator had not taken possession of the company&#039;s assets, the registered office had been handed over to the secured creditor, and no notice inviting claims from creditors or workmen had been issued. The Court treated these circumstances as showing that no irreversible step had been taken and accepted that the insolvency framework would protect creditor and workmen claims. The transfer was therefore warranted, subject to deposit of costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753903</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>