<?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 (9) TMI 328 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758084</link>
    <description>The NCLAT Principal Bench allowed the appeal against admission of a Section 7 application by a financial creditor. The tribunal held that the transaction between family companies was not a financial debt under Section 5(8) of IBC as it lacked the essential element of disbursal for time value of money. While the corporate debtor admitted the debt of Rs.1,22,50,000, it denied the loan letter dated 20.09.2010 with 12% interest. The adjudicating authority erred in admitting the application without examining the true nature of the transaction. The creditor was allowed to retain the amount already received via draft.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Jan 2025 14:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=766972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 328 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758084</link>
      <description>The NCLAT Principal Bench allowed the appeal against admission of a Section 7 application by a financial creditor. The tribunal held that the transaction between family companies was not a financial debt under Section 5(8) of IBC as it lacked the essential element of disbursal for time value of money. While the corporate debtor admitted the debt of Rs.1,22,50,000, it denied the loan letter dated 20.09.2010 with 12% interest. The adjudicating authority erred in admitting the application without examining the true nature of the transaction. The creditor was allowed to retain the amount already received via draft.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758084</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>