<?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 (11) TMI 848 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401093</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that including a third-party company in the Resolution Plan was permissible under the I&amp;amp;B Code, 2016. The plan&#039;s treatment of Financial Creditors based on assent or dissent was found not to be discriminatory. The Resolution Plan was deemed compliant with the Code&#039;s provisions, and both appeals were dismissed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2020 10:25:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628755" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 848 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401093</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that including a third-party company in the Resolution Plan was permissible under the I&amp;amp;B Code, 2016. The plan&#039;s treatment of Financial Creditors based on assent or dissent was found not to be discriminatory. The Resolution Plan was deemed compliant with the Code&#039;s provisions, and both appeals were dismissed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401093</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>