https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451082 The NCLAT held that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) cannot consider resolution plans from applicants not listed in the Prospective Resolution Applicants (PRAs) list per Regulation 39(1)(b) of CIRP Regulations, 2016. Three applicants, including Patanjali, had not submitted Expression of Interest (EOI) applications and were not on the PRAs list. While Regulation 36A permits CoC to modify EOI invitations, no fresh Form G was issued to allow new participants. The CoC resolved to confine consideration only to applicants on the final PRAs list dated 07.11.2023, excluding additional new entrants. The NCLAT allowed both appeals, setting aside the impugned orders dated 12.02.2024 and 21.02.2024. en-us Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Mar 2024 20:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451082 The NCLAT held that the Committee of Creditors (CoC) cannot consider resolution plans from applicants not listed in the Prospective Resolution Applicants (PRAs) list per Regulation 39(1)(b) of CIRP Regulations, 2016. Three applicants, including Patanjali, had not submitted Expression of Interest (EOI) applications and were not on the PRAs list. While Regulation 36A permits CoC to modify EOI invitations, no fresh Form G was issued to allow new participants. The CoC resolved to confine consideration only to applicants on the final PRAs list dated 07.11.2023, excluding additional new entrants. The NCLAT allowed both appeals, setting aside the impugned orders dated 12.02.2024 and 21.02.2024. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451082