<?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 (11) TMI 132 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761146</link>
    <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging admission of a Section 7 petition under IBC 2016. The appellant argued that default occurred on 21.11.2020 (after recall notice), falling within Section 10A&#039;s moratorium period (25.03.2020 to 25.03.2021), making the petition inadmissible. The NCLAT held that actual default occurred in January 2020 when monthly installments weren&#039;t paid as scheduled, with the recall notice being merely a procedural consequence of pre-existing default. Since default preceded the Section 10A cut-off period, the moratorium didn&#039;t apply and the petition was validly admitted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 16:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776654" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 132 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761146</link>
      <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal challenging admission of a Section 7 petition under IBC 2016. The appellant argued that default occurred on 21.11.2020 (after recall notice), falling within Section 10A&#039;s moratorium period (25.03.2020 to 25.03.2021), making the petition inadmissible. The NCLAT held that actual default occurred in January 2020 when monthly installments weren&#039;t paid as scheduled, with the recall notice being merely a procedural consequence of pre-existing default. Since default preceded the Section 10A cut-off period, the moratorium didn&#039;t apply and the petition was validly admitted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761146</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>