<?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 98 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417847</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 30(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, finding that the differential treatment in payment between Operational and Financial Creditors was not inequitable. The Tribunal held that the Resolution Plan complied with legal requirements, dismissing the appeal as it did not meet the criteria under Section 61(3) of the Code.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2022 11:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=669191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (2) TMI 98 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417847</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the approval of the Resolution Plan under Section 30(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, finding that the differential treatment in payment between Operational and Financial Creditors was not inequitable. The Tribunal held that the Resolution Plan complied with legal requirements, dismissing the appeal as it did not meet the criteria under Section 61(3) of the Code.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417847</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>