<?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 1351 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762365</link>
    <description>NCLAT Principal Bench set aside CIRP admission under Section 7, finding collusion between creditor and debtor companies. The tribunal determined that a common director holding 21.77% and 66.66% shares in creditor companies and 33.34% in debtor company constituted related parties under Section 5(24)(m). Citing Phoenix ARC precedent, amounts disbursed by related parties don&#039;t qualify as financial debt. The tribunal found creditor&#039;s petition was collusive rather than for genuine insolvency resolution, as evidenced by shared directorship and financial statements showing related party borrowings. Appeal allowed, CIRP order set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=779979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1351 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI - LB</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762365</link>
      <description>NCLAT Principal Bench set aside CIRP admission under Section 7, finding collusion between creditor and debtor companies. The tribunal determined that a common director holding 21.77% and 66.66% shares in creditor companies and 33.34% in debtor company constituted related parties under Section 5(24)(m). Citing Phoenix ARC precedent, amounts disbursed by related parties don&#039;t qualify as financial debt. The tribunal found creditor&#039;s petition was collusive rather than for genuine insolvency resolution, as evidenced by shared directorship and financial statements showing related party borrowings. Appeal allowed, CIRP order set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>IBC</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>