<?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 (7) TMI 318 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755098</link>
    <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of a Section 7 application under IBC. The appellant&#039;s application was rejected as barred by Section 10A, which prohibits insolvency proceedings for defaults during the COVID protection period. The appellant attempted to amend the default date from 05.09.2020 (within Section 10A period) to 01.04.2021 without justifiable cause. The tribunal held that while amendments to Section 7 applications are permissible per SC precedent, changing the default date without proper justification would undermine Section 10A&#039;s protective purpose. The adjudicating authority correctly rejected both the amendment application and the Section 7 application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2024 17:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=759134" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 318 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755098</link>
      <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging rejection of a Section 7 application under IBC. The appellant&#039;s application was rejected as barred by Section 10A, which prohibits insolvency proceedings for defaults during the COVID protection period. The appellant attempted to amend the default date from 05.09.2020 (within Section 10A period) to 01.04.2021 without justifiable cause. The tribunal held that while amendments to Section 7 applications are permissible per SC precedent, changing the default date without proper justification would undermine Section 10A&#039;s protective purpose. The adjudicating authority correctly rejected both the amendment application and the Section 7 application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755098</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>