<?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 (10) TMI 632 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760033</link>
    <description>Provident fund and gratuity dues of workmen and employees fall within an approved resolution plan where an integral clarificatory note, given overriding effect, requires payment of any additional statutory or other liabilities from the plan&#039;s financial outlay. The broad wording covers admitted or unadmitted, crystallised or uncrystallised, known or unknown liabilities, so these dues are not independently borne outside the plan. Unpaid salary claimed for July to November 2020 was not granted because recognised salary and wage components had already been accounted for as CIRP costs, with no factual basis for additional payment. Plan approval remained sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Oct 2024 10:33:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=772837" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (10) TMI 632 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760033</link>
      <description>Provident fund and gratuity dues of workmen and employees fall within an approved resolution plan where an integral clarificatory note, given overriding effect, requires payment of any additional statutory or other liabilities from the plan&#039;s financial outlay. The broad wording covers admitted or unadmitted, crystallised or uncrystallised, known or unknown liabilities, so these dues are not independently borne outside the plan. Unpaid salary claimed for July to November 2020 was not granted because recognised salary and wage components had already been accounted for as CIRP costs, with no factual basis for additional payment. Plan approval remained sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>