<?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>2023 (9) TMI 1744 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466295</link>
    <description>The liquidation regulations permit auction sale of assets and allow reserve price reductions after an unsuccessful auction, initially by up to 25% and thereafter by not more than 10% at a time. Applying that framework, the Tribunal noted that the stakeholder was aware of the successive reductions through consultation meetings and produced no documentary material showing breach of the sale procedure, valuation requirements, or reporting obligations. The sale had been completed, full consideration received, and the sale certificate issued, so interference was unwarranted in the time-bound insolvency process. The challenge was also treated as belated, and no ground was made out to set aside the sale.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Feb 2026 19:07:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=883246" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (9) TMI 1744 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466295</link>
      <description>The liquidation regulations permit auction sale of assets and allow reserve price reductions after an unsuccessful auction, initially by up to 25% and thereafter by not more than 10% at a time. Applying that framework, the Tribunal noted that the stakeholder was aware of the successive reductions through consultation meetings and produced no documentary material showing breach of the sale procedure, valuation requirements, or reporting obligations. The sale had been completed, full consideration received, and the sale certificate issued, so interference was unwarranted in the time-bound insolvency process. The challenge was also treated as belated, and no ground was made out to set aside the sale.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 15 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466295</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>