<?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 (1) TMI 1382 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308621</link>
    <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the Resolution Professional not to deduct Rs. 34 crores from the final payment to the Appellant, considering it as Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) costs. The Tribunal emphasized that payments to vendors during CIRP were essential to maintain the Corporate Debtor as a going concern and should be classified as CIRP costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 07:55:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=719081" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 1382 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308621</link>
      <description>The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, directing the Resolution Professional not to deduct Rs. 34 crores from the final payment to the Appellant, considering it as Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) costs. The Tribunal emphasized that payments to vendors during CIRP were essential to maintain the Corporate Debtor as a going concern and should be classified as CIRP costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308621</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>