<?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 (9) TMI 327 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , BENGALURU BENCH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758083</link>
    <description>An exclusive sponsorship arrangement granting advertising and promotional rights, use of intellectual property, match tickets and allied benefits for consideration can constitute a supply of services and give rise to operational debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Unpaid invoices, consent for bank guarantee encashment and repeated emails seeking payment established default, while the objection that no formal contract existed was not a genuine pre-existing dispute because it arose after the demand notice and did not dispute the specific dues. The petition was properly authorised and the Code prevails over referral to arbitration in a section 9 application.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2024 08:17:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=766971" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 327 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , BENGALURU BENCH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758083</link>
      <description>An exclusive sponsorship arrangement granting advertising and promotional rights, use of intellectual property, match tickets and allied benefits for consideration can constitute a supply of services and give rise to operational debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Unpaid invoices, consent for bank guarantee encashment and repeated emails seeking payment established default, while the objection that no formal contract existed was not a genuine pre-existing dispute because it arose after the demand notice and did not dispute the specific dues. The petition was properly authorised and the Code prevails over referral to arbitration in a section 9 application.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758083</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>