<?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 389 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755169</link>
    <description>Rent and allied lease charges for business premises were treated as operational debt, and the lessor was accepted as an operational creditor because tenancy-related dues fall within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Applying the Mobilox standard, the tribunal found no real and pre-existing dispute: objections over assignment of lease, conversion charges, later notices, and subsequent proceedings were unsupported, inconsistent with the lease terms, or arose after the demand notice. The lessee was held responsible for conversion charges under the lease deed. The section 9 application was therefore maintainable, and initiation of CIRP was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2024 10:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=759291" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 389 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755169</link>
      <description>Rent and allied lease charges for business premises were treated as operational debt, and the lessor was accepted as an operational creditor because tenancy-related dues fall within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Applying the Mobilox standard, the tribunal found no real and pre-existing dispute: objections over assignment of lease, conversion charges, later notices, and subsequent proceedings were unsupported, inconsistent with the lease terms, or arose after the demand notice. The lessee was held responsible for conversion charges under the lease deed. The section 9 application was therefore maintainable, and initiation of CIRP was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755169</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>