<?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>2024 (2) TMI 557 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449406</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging Resolution Plan approval in CIRP proceedings. Resolution Professional filed application after no plans received within 180-day period. Flat Buyers Association proposed completing unfinished project with developer assistance. Adjudicating Authority extended CIRP period noting buyers&#039; desire to complete project. Committee of Creditors approved Resolution Plan with 90.45% vote share, with 97% held by flat buyers. Appellant financial creditor dissented but was entitled to liquidation amount under Section 30(2) IBC as per Section 53 priority. NCLAT found no grounds to interfere with approved plan facilitating project completion and corporate debtor resolution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jul 2024 12:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=743290" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 557 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449406</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging Resolution Plan approval in CIRP proceedings. Resolution Professional filed application after no plans received within 180-day period. Flat Buyers Association proposed completing unfinished project with developer assistance. Adjudicating Authority extended CIRP period noting buyers&#039; desire to complete project. Committee of Creditors approved Resolution Plan with 90.45% vote share, with 97% held by flat buyers. Appellant financial creditor dissented but was entitled to liquidation amount under Section 30(2) IBC as per Section 53 priority. NCLAT found no grounds to interfere with approved plan facilitating project completion and corporate debtor resolution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449406</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>