https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761850 NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower tribunal's decision that rejected the insolvency application due to improper service of Section 8 notice. The notice was addressed only to key managerial personnel (KMP) individually rather than to the corporate debtor company itself at its registered office as required under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The court held that proper notice to the juristic person is mandatory for maintaining a Section 9 application, and addressing KMP individually does not constitute valid service to the company. The appeal failed as the original order contained no errors warranting interference. en-us Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Nov 2024 09:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761850 NCLAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the lower tribunal's decision that rejected the insolvency application due to improper service of Section 8 notice. The notice was addressed only to key managerial personnel (KMP) individually rather than to the corporate debtor company itself at its registered office as required under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The court held that proper notice to the juristic person is mandatory for maintaining a Section 9 application, and addressing KMP individually does not constitute valid service to the company. The appeal failed as the original order contained no errors warranting interference. Case-Laws IBC Thu, 03 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761850