<?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>2022 (2) TMI 1513 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463721</link>
    <description>The limitation for a Section 7 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code application had to be assessed in light of prior proceedings before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, because such proceedings could affect computation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the embargo under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. As the record did not clearly show that the Tribunal had considered the BIFR order and related material, the limitation finding could not be sustained on the existing record. The matter required reconsideration by the Tribunal after taking the BIFR order into account, if it was on record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2025 19:28:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850150" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 1513 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463721</link>
      <description>The limitation for a Section 7 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code application had to be assessed in light of prior proceedings before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, because such proceedings could affect computation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the embargo under Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. As the record did not clearly show that the Tribunal had considered the BIFR order and related material, the limitation finding could not be sustained on the existing record. The matter required reconsideration by the Tribunal after taking the BIFR order into account, if it was on record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463721</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>