<?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>2020 (2) TMI 1259 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392815</link>
    <description>Section 43 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was applied to hold that the impugned mortgage and re-mortgage transactions were preferential, as they were created for the benefit of lenders on account of antecedent liability, fell within the look-back period for a related party, and were not in the ordinary course of business or financial affairs of the corporate debtor. The Court also held that a third-party mortgage securing another borrower&#039;s debt creates a security interest, but does not by itself make the mortgagee a financial creditor of the corporate debtor, because financial debt requires disbursal against the time value of money. The avoidance order was restored and the lenders&#039; claims as financial creditors were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2025 13:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=605438" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1259 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392815</link>
      <description>Section 43 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code was applied to hold that the impugned mortgage and re-mortgage transactions were preferential, as they were created for the benefit of lenders on account of antecedent liability, fell within the look-back period for a related party, and were not in the ordinary course of business or financial affairs of the corporate debtor. The Court also held that a third-party mortgage securing another borrower&#039;s debt creates a security interest, but does not by itself make the mortgagee a financial creditor of the corporate debtor, because financial debt requires disbursal against the time value of money. The avoidance order was restored and the lenders&#039; claims as financial creditors were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>