<?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>Undertaking as going concern: sale of isolated asset avoided special resolution requirement and purchaser&#039;s title upheld.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97572</link>
    <description>The NCLAT held that an &#039;undertaking&#039; means a going concern-an organised revenue generating business integrated with assets-and not an isolated asset; the 20% quantitative test in the Explanation applies only after a qualitative finding of undertaking, so sale of the Saakar Bungalow (a passive mortgaged property acquired in 2017) was an asset sale that did not require a special resolution. The Tribunal upheld that the purchaser was a bona fide purchaser under the circumstances of a SARFAESI distress sale and that alleged undervaluation, with valuation on an &#039;as is where is&#039; basis, did not warrant appellate interference in the NCLT&#039;s exercise of discretion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:24:54 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:24:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889911" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Undertaking as going concern: sale of isolated asset avoided special resolution requirement and purchaser&#039;s title upheld.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97572</link>
      <description>The NCLAT held that an &#039;undertaking&#039; means a going concern-an organised revenue generating business integrated with assets-and not an isolated asset; the 20% quantitative test in the Explanation applies only after a qualitative finding of undertaking, so sale of the Saakar Bungalow (a passive mortgaged property acquired in 2017) was an asset sale that did not require a special resolution. The Tribunal upheld that the purchaser was a bona fide purchaser under the circumstances of a SARFAESI distress sale and that alleged undervaluation, with valuation on an &#039;as is where is&#039; basis, did not warrant appellate interference in the NCLT&#039;s exercise of discretion.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2026 11:24:54 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97572</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>