<?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 (4) TMI 868 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751687</link>
    <description>Fees of the erstwhile Interim Resolution Professional and CIRP expenses were examined for reasonableness, with the Appellate Tribunal noting that the IRP had carried out the necessary CIRP steps, including public notices, claim verification, committee constitution, reports, information memorandum and resolution plan-related work. The delay in CIRP progress and in approving liquidation was attributed to the sole CoC member, which repeatedly deferred decisions and sought higher internal approvals. The IRP had already reduced its claimed fee, and the Adjudicating Authority further moderated the expenses on the material before it. On these facts, the fees and expenses were held reasonable and no interference was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:12:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=750797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 868 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751687</link>
      <description>Fees of the erstwhile Interim Resolution Professional and CIRP expenses were examined for reasonableness, with the Appellate Tribunal noting that the IRP had carried out the necessary CIRP steps, including public notices, claim verification, committee constitution, reports, information memorandum and resolution plan-related work. The delay in CIRP progress and in approving liquidation was attributed to the sole CoC member, which repeatedly deferred decisions and sought higher internal approvals. The IRP had already reduced its claimed fee, and the Adjudicating Authority further moderated the expenses on the material before it. On these facts, the fees and expenses were held reasonable and no interference was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Insolvency and Bankruptcy</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>