<?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 (11) TMI 213 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761227</link>
    <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging denial of opportunity to submit Section 12A settlement proposal during ongoing CIRP. Appellant sought withdrawal after CoC had already rejected their earlier settlement proposal with 80.22% voting against it, while simultaneously approving SRA&#039;s resolution plan with 80.84% votes. NCLAT held that once CoC exercises commercial wisdom through voting, suspended management cannot force reconsideration of rejected proposals. Court emphasized primacy of CoC&#039;s business decisions and noted proceedings had exceeded five years, making further delays contrary to IBC objectives. Appeal dismissed without interference to lower court&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Nov 2024 08:47:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776815" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 213 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761227</link>
      <description>NCLAT dismissed appeal challenging denial of opportunity to submit Section 12A settlement proposal during ongoing CIRP. Appellant sought withdrawal after CoC had already rejected their earlier settlement proposal with 80.22% voting against it, while simultaneously approving SRA&#039;s resolution plan with 80.84% votes. NCLAT held that once CoC exercises commercial wisdom through voting, suspended management cannot force reconsideration of rejected proposals. Court emphasized primacy of CoC&#039;s business decisions and noted proceedings had exceeded five years, making further delays contrary to IBC objectives. Appeal dismissed without interference to lower court&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761227</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>