<?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 (3) TMI 81 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450300</link>
    <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal by an ARC challenging its exclusion from the Committee of Creditors. The Resolution Professional correctly deemed the appellant akin to a related party, making it ineligible for CoC participation. The appellant&#039;s claim was based on an assignment dated 09.09.2020 from SEFL, a related party to the Corporate Debtor. The tribunal found that funding for the assignment allegedly came through related entities, and the appellant failed to provide evidence of legitimate funding sources. The timing of the assignment coinciding with the claim filing date indicated the assignment was made solely to participate in CIRP proceedings, justifying the exclusion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Mar 2024 06:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745481" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 81 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450300</link>
      <description>The NCLAT dismissed an appeal by an ARC challenging its exclusion from the Committee of Creditors. The Resolution Professional correctly deemed the appellant akin to a related party, making it ineligible for CoC participation. The appellant&#039;s claim was based on an assignment dated 09.09.2020 from SEFL, a related party to the Corporate Debtor. The tribunal found that funding for the assignment allegedly came through related entities, and the appellant failed to provide evidence of legitimate funding sources. The timing of the assignment coinciding with the claim filing date indicated the assignment was made solely to participate in CIRP proceedings, justifying the exclusion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450300</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>